this is a digital document from the collections of the...
TRANSCRIPT
This is a digital document from the collections of the Wyoming Water Resources Data System (WRDS) Library.
For additional information about this document and the document conversion process, please contact WRDS at [email protected] and include the phrase
“Digital Documents” in your subject heading.
To view other documents please visit the WRDS Library online at: http://library.wrds.uwyo.edu
Mailing Address: Water Resources Data System
University of Wyoming, Dept 3943 1000 E University Avenue
Laramie, WY 82071
Physical Address: Wyoming Hall, Room 249 University of Wyoming
Laramie, WY 82071
Phone: (307) 766-6651 Fax: (307) 766-3785
Funding for WRDS and the creation of this electronic document was provided by the Wyoming Water Development Commission
(http://wwdc.state.wy.us)
51.1248 (Globe Canal) B
WYOMING WATER DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
GLOBE CANAL INVESTIGATIONS
LEVEL II
REHABILITATION PLAN
DECEMBER 1989
JAMES GORES AND ASSOCIATES 450A SOUTH FEDERAL BOULEVARD RIVERTON, WYOMING 82501 (307) 856-2444
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
C.E. SPURLOCK JR. AND ASSOCIATES INC.
W. ROGER MILLER
WYOMING WATER DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
PREPARED By:
GLOBE CANAL INVESTIGATIONS
LEVEL II
REHABILITATION PLAN
DECEMBER 1989
JAMES GORES AND ASSOCIATES 450A SOUTH FEDERAL RIVERTON~ WY 82501 (307) 856-2444
C.E. SPURLOCK JR. AND ASSOCIATES INC. P.O. Box 0 LANDER~ WY 82520 (307) 332-5280
ROGER MILLER 1855 BEGONIA STREET CASPER~ WY 82604 (307) 237-0027
GLOBE CANAL REHABILITATION PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Introduction Project Background Purpose of This Investigation
SECTION 2 - SEEPAGE SOURCE IDENTIFICATION Statement of Problem Geohydrologic System and Its Operation
Geolcgic Framework Operition of the System
Movement of Water in the Terrace Deposits Discharge Recharge
Water Budget Estimated Consumptive Water Use for Selected Groups
Location and Extent of Seeps~ Springs and Slumping Rehabilitation or Remediation of Seepage Summary of Geohydrologic Mapping
SECTION 3 - SOLUTION ALTERNATIVES Introduction Philosophy of Alternatives Development Limitations of Existing Subdrain System Area of Greatest Seepage Problems Impacts of Future Seep Water Drainage Systems Expections For Project Results Alternative No. 1 * Alternative No. 2 Alternative No. 3 Alternative No.4 Alternative No. 5
SECTION 4 - CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Considerations Conclusions Recommendations Sponsorship Recommendations
APPENDIX
* The presentation of each Alternative contains the following sub-sections:
Estimated Cost Description Advantages Disadvantages Utility Conflicts Easement Requirements Other Considerations
EXHIBITS
GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS
MAP OF EXISTING DRAIN SYSTEM
PLAN AND PROFILE
CROSS SECTIONS, Pages 1-4
ALTERNATIVE NO. 1
ALTE~NATIVE NO. 2 FIGURE 3-1
ALTERNATIVE NO. 3
ALTERNATIVE NO. 4
ALTERNATIVE NO. S
AERIAL PHOTO
FIGURE 4-1
PROPERTY OWNERSHIPS ADJACENT TO GLOBE CANAL (in Appendix)
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARY
This report investigates the ice clogging and flooding problems of the
Globe Canal along its reach through the Town of Lovell, Wyoming. The canal
traverses the base of the terrace hill on the south edge of town. Seep
water issues from this hill up slope of the canal year-round. In sub-
freezing weather this seep water freezes into ice masses. With the
constantly flowing seep water as their water source, these ice masses grow
ever larger, propagating downhill filling the canal and flowing onto
properties below the canal.
The seep water responsible for this problem almost entirely originates
as agricultural irrigation water applied on the Lovell Bench. Thus, the
nature of this problem is one of agricultural drainage.
This rehabilitation plan explores five different approaches to
mitigating the problem. Those alternative approaches are discussed in
detail in the balance of this report. The total project cost for the
different alternatives range between $185,000 and $678,000. The project
sponsor, in conjunction with the Wyoming Water Development Commission, will
select one of these alternatives to be developed into a conceptual design as
the second phase of this project.
RECOMMENDATION
for:
It is recommended that the project sponsor develop a conceptual design
1. A groundwater drain, extending between Nevada and McKinley Avenues near the north rim of the Lovell Bench, and
2. A seep water drain in Doerr Draw, and a winter flow spill structure near Jersey Avenue which will remove free flowing water from the canal near the west edge of town.
These two improvements should eliminate most winter time ice flooding
now occurring along the Globe Canal in Lovell. These improvements will make
it possible to divert free flowing water from the canal at the west edge of
town. This will reduce the quantity of water available for ice formation in
the canal. Also, it will prevent the canal from carrying snow melt water
into town and overtopping the canal when encountering ice blockages. The
recommended ground water drain on the Lovell Bench will interrupt water now
reaching the hillside and surfacing as seep water. This will reduc0 ice
accumulation in the most troublesome section of the canal.
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION
The Globe Canal is located in Big Horn County, Wyoming. The canal
diverts irrigation water from the Shoshone River near Byron. The canal
flows Northeast a distance of approximately 10 miles delivering irrigation
water to farms situated in the Shoshone River Valley.
According to a 1987 U.S. Soil Conversation report the canal delivers
water to approximately 55 users. Of those 36 are farm units. The balance
are city lots in the Town of Lovell. The canal serves a total 2892 acres.
Depending on the season of the year, the canal diverts between 40 and 80
CFS.
The canal is governed by the Farmers Protective Association. The group
is not assembled as a district under Wyoming law and thereby does not have
taxing and other legal authorities granted districts.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
For
through
traverses
approximately 3/4 of a mile of its route the Globe Canal flows
the Town cf Lovell. In this segment of the canals reach it
the hillside on the southern edge of Town. This hillside also
forms the southern flank of the Shoshone River bottom terrace.
Characteristic of rivers in this region the Shoshone River Valley has
two benched terraces. The present river channel occupies the lower bench in
which Lovell is situated and which the Globe Canal serves. A second bench
from the ancestral river lies south and some 40 feet above the present river
plain. The Globe Canal traverses the north facing hillside formed by the
junction of these two benches.
Again, characteristic of the area, the upper bench is a clay shale bed
rock overlaid by approximately 15 to 18 feet of gravel and 2 foot soil
profile.
through
Applied
the soil
irrigation water and natural
profile and gravel until it
precipitation
encounters the
percolates
underlying
shale. This impervious barrier then forces the water to migrate to natural
and manmade drains. Part of the area of discharge for this water is the
interface between the shale and gravel that occurs along the face of the
hillside occupied by the Globe Canal. This area of discharge seeps water
year round.
Along its reach through the town the gravel/shale interface is some 10
to 15 feet above the elevation of the Globe Canal. The seep water
discharged at the gravel/shale interface flows down the hillside both
overland and underground until it encounters the Globe Canal. At that point
much of the flow is intercepted and is carried down the canal.
During summer months this phenomenon presents few problems. But during
the freezing weather of the winter months this seep water becomes a severe
nuisance. Water that reaches the canal flows down the canal until it
freezes. Ice masses form on the slope above the canal where the seep water
issues from the hillside. In areas where significant amounts of water flow
from this bank, the ice continues to accumulate and forms glacier type ice
masses. These progress downhill, fill the canal with ice and eventually
overtopping the canal and flow onto adjacent properties and streets.
The entire northeast facing hillside is shaded in winter months because
of the sun's low altitude. Because of this the ice accumulation does not
recede until spring weather has brought an extended period of warm weather.
During this period snow melt run-off intercepted above town flows down the
ditch until it encounters the ice clogged canal in town. This water then
commonly overtops the canal, flooding adjacent properties and streets.
PURPOSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION
The purpose of this investigation is to identify and explore several
different concepts which may offer relief to the icing and flooding
problems. This evaluation will present information on the sources of this
problem water. It will present different options of solving the problem.
And it will discuss the costs, disadvantages and advantages of each option.
/
•
26
•
\ \ \ \
\
1 \
w ().) U'\ o
\ ,
•• •••
\ , \
----=.J.. -Ii- - -,1-·- ·'L- ---.,-~~==~~==~~~====~~====~~==~~==~====~==~
• • • •• • ••• • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••• • •
• •• • •
• • • • • • • • •
••••• • • • • •
• •• • • • • • • . _... .. .
• ••• • ••••• • • •
• • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • .' • • • • • • • • • •
1 ;
\ ---
\ L- ___ ~\~ __ ~I·~_.]~~·
---~~ ...... - ---- ~
o JOO 600
/":= 600'
--_ ..... --_ .. __ .. ~
.,---.~~---....... ".~. .
lfJi£NO
Wa ter Well
Spring or Seep
OpEn Drain
Water Surface Elevation
\ \., ~/
~--------?~----~-
.. --.--?------~
(3895€ ) He" indicates estimated elevation
-- , ,. -Primary Drain I - . -_"_-_se_cO_rl_da r_y _D_ra i_n _ J
I • Active Seep Area
I .~ I
--.. ---J..~ 39()9.0
~ __ ........ c' •.
~-~<-,,,,,,.:,<·"-~7
BENCH
\ \ \
-" .... '"
\ -, •
III i
I
I ,t
( "\ I
I I
I I
I
~ I I
I ~ i
/
~..,
c o .,... ~ ~ Ol 0
~t-" .~
.;..I .;.l ~, I'd I!J :> :> Q.l c..
.... 1i.J
r- f,. <":I Q.l C .;..l
~ r:: '-' :.
"C
15 § o 0
,... f,. I!.!l~
(PR~~U~J l ~~~~ I . j
/
s=:errCN 2
aGBE Cl.J'J'p'L
SE2PAGE SOURCE ID~~IFICATION
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Ground We ter discharges from the Lovell Bench into the Globe Canal from
seeps and springs throughout the year. The seeps and springs resul t frau dis
charge of ground-water where the contact of the terrace gravels with the lmder
lying Cretaceous shales, siltstones and sandstones intersect the water table.
This seepage effects the canal and its operation and nearby areas along nost of
the reach of the canal. Where these seeps occur in unpopulated areas, the ef
fects of seepage are insignificant. Hc::wever, when seepage occurs in populated
areas, such as in the Town of Lovell or along major roads f some of the effects
can be detriITental and create hazards. Sane of the effects are considered
p:>sitive. Some of the effects are:
I . Seepage into the canal creates continuous flCM throughout the year.
During the grCMing season it is masked by irrigation flarl in the canal. In the
spring and fall it creates a small, free-flowing stream. But, during severe
winters it freezes and overtops the ('.anal.
II. The seeps and springs create a "greenbeltn of dense vegetation along
the face of the terraCE: above the canal. The vegetati.on is diverse, ranging
frau "dry-land" type plants such as sagebrush and thistle, to phreatophytic or
water-loving plants such as cottonwc:xXl, willow and wild rose, to hydrophytic or
water-dwelling plants such as cattail and water cress. Locally, this vegeta
tion forms nearly impenetrable thickets and at the end of each growing season
can be afire threat.
2-1
III. Ground water seepage from the hillside saturates the soil mantle and
the underlying shale and siltstone of the bedrock causing sltnnping. Active and
inactive sltnnps occur along the entire reach of the canal through Lovell. Sorre
of the slumps have caused constrictions and misalignment of the carlal and ac
tive sltnnps pose a potential hazard for failure. The tops of nxL~y of the
slumps are flat to concave upNard and are complete 1 y saturated fonning SVlanlpS
and marshy areas. Many of the areas between the top of the saturated slumps
and the canal are dry, but in a short distance downst :-eam, 10 to 50 feet, the
water overtops the slump fonning an unstable, slump-prone area from the top of
the slump to the canal.
IV. During the winter 1 ground water discharges from seeps and springs and
freezes on the hillside above the canal and in the canal. During extended sub
freezing periods, the canal fills with ice and the ice overtops the canal and
glaciates down streets and into nearby yards, basements and crawlspaces. This
large mass of ice in the canal can also cause instability in the canal banks
with some p:>tential for failure.
V. High ground-water levels belo.v the canal from ear 1 y spring through
the irrigation season are caused by leakage through the botton and sides of the
canal. This occurs in early spring when the ice in the canal melts and when
the ice fomed below the canal melts. leakage also occurs when water is first
put into the canal each spring, during the irrigation season when higher-than
normal water levels occur in the canal, and after periooic canal maintenance.
All of these factors can cause high water levels just below the canal.
GEOHYDR()LCGIC SYSTEM AND ITS OPERATION
Before the causes and sources of seepage into the Globe Canal can be de
fined and before remedial steps to alleviate SOIne of the obvious problems can
be developed, the geohydrological system in the area and how it operates Imlst
2-2
be defined. The geohydrologic system discussed in this study is the Iovell
Bench or Terrace which consists of the area between Foster Gulch ru'1d Sand Draw.
The Lovell Bench is part of the larger Powell Terrace system which extends from
Cody to the confluence of the Shoshone and Big Horn rivers (~0ckin, 1937).
is the uppermost terrace along the Shoshoni River. The Lovell Bench is separ-
ated both physically and hydrologically from the Powell Terrace by dissection
from Foster Gulch and Sand Draw. The bench is about two miles wide and four
miles long. The section of the bench which impacts the TONTI of wvell ::xtends
from Wyoming Highway 32 east northeast to u.S. Highway 310 just east cf Lovell,
a distance of about two miles. The problem reach of the canal is less thail
3/4-rnile long.
The geohydrological system consists of two parts, the physical system and
the operation of the system. The physical system is the geologic framework.
The operation of the system consists of the interrelation of recharge to the
system and the water-bearing properties of the system, including water rrove-
ment, storage, and discharge from the system.
GEOLOGIC FRAMEWJRK
The geohydrologic framework of the lovell Bench consists of many parts.
Those which must be defined before the operation of the system can be under-
stood are:
1. The stratigraphy of the rocks which corrprise the Lovell Bench;
2. The total and saturated thicknesses of the gravel;
3. The hydrologic characteristics of the gravel;
4. The topography on the top of the terrace;
5. The thickness and hydrologic characteristics of the soil profile; and
6. The configuration of the contact of the gravel wi th the under 1 yillg
Cretaceous rocks.
2-3
The stratigraphy of the Lovell Bench consists of terrace deposits of sand
and gravel overlain by a relatively thin soil profile. The terrace deposits
are lli~derlain by shale, siltstone and occasionally sandstone of the Cretaceous
Hesa Verde and Frontier fonnations. Small alluvial fans occur at the rrouth of
each gully that disects the terrace edge. The fans intertongue wi th canplex
slump deposits which occur between the gullies. The slt.rrnps are derived from
the terrace sand and gravel and the underlying Cretaceous rocks. The slumps
form flat to concave uJ;Mard benches at the terrace edge and sorre show Imlltiple
slunping. The entire reach of the canal from Lane 12 to u.s. Highway 310 ShOY-1S
evidence of slumping.
The terrace deposits consist of poorly sorted sand and gravel with locally
ablll1dant clay and silt. They are part of an old alluvial stream system con
sisting of multiple rreander belts with F-Oint- and channel-bar deposits, meander
cutoffs and other depositional features comron to alluvial systems. The geol
ogy is canplex and individual channels would be difficult to locate without in
tensive test drilling and borehole geophysical logging.
The thickness of the gravel on the lovell Bench is poorly documented. A
large number of danestic water wells have been cOII'pleted in the area but few
have adequate geologic data. Many of the,wells are driven wells and rrost of
the wells which were completed by cable-tool or other methods have poor logs.
Based on limited outcrop and the available well data, the elevations on the top
of the Lovell Bench, and assuming that the contact of the terrace deposits and
the underlying shale is subparallel, the terrace gravels may be as much as 30
feet thick. It is probably in the 20 to 25-foot range near the terrace edge.
The soils in the area have been mapped by the SCS (Soil Conservation Ser
vice, 1969). The soil profile on top of the terrace was derived from the ter
race and from slope wash from the surrounding Cretaceous rocks. The soils on
the terrace are described by the SCS as shallow and well drained with nDderate
2-4
to rapid penneabili ty . The slopes range from 0 to 3 percent. The soils con
sist of clay loam to sandy clay loam surface ill1d subsoil layers with loamy sub
strata. The soils range from a feyl inches to 2 feet thick . Locally gravel is
exposed at the s1.rrface.
The soils mapped on the steep edge of the terrace are variable and derived
from the terrace dep.Jsi ts and from the under lying shale, sil t and sandstone.
The soils were formed by two mechanisms. The soils on the hillside were formed
by the normal processes of slope wash and weathering. w"'hereas, the soils on
the small slump-formed benches were formed by solifluction and slumping of sat
urated material. The soils consist of shallcw, well drained, but slCMly perme
able materials. The soil has a high shrink-swell potential and consists of
bentonitic silty clay loam to silty clay surface, subsoil and substrate hor
izons and are underlain by bentonitic shale and silt. Locally, the soils con
tain abundant clay-round pebble to cobble gravel. The slopes on top of the
slmnps range from 0 to 10 percent and are nearly flat to concave upward. The
slopes on the steep sides of the terrace are as much as 60 percent. Where the
surface is flat and poorly drained the soils are saturated. In some areas, a
hummocky caliche (calcium carronate) rind has been deposited on t~e surface in
the discharge areas; in other areas where the ground is not saturated, a sim
ilar caliche zone occurs indicating historic seepage.
The terrace dep.Jsits are underlain by shale, siltstone and sandstone of
the Cretaceous Mesa Verde and Frontier formations. These rocks dip 6 to 10
degrees west-southwest on the west flank of a broad anticline. The pre-terrace
structure consisted of a series of northwest trending highs and lows created by
differential erosion of the shale, sil t and sandstone, but was was subdued by
the meandering of the ancestral Shoshone River when the terraces were formed.
This old surface probably effects the hydrology and the location of seeps. The
overall effect is probably minimal.
2-5
OPERl\TION OF THE SYSTFM
r1any factors effect the operation of til.e geohydrologic system. They in
clude recharge to the system, discharge from the system, and what happens as
the water travels through the sys~em. Although some of these factors are lD
signif icant, they must be addressed before the operation of the system can te
understood.
Recharge
Recharge consists of precipitation on the aquifer, underflow from up
gradient areas, overland runoff from outside of the area, discharge from bed
rock aquifers, leakage from canals which traverse the area, infiltration from
irrigation, and infiltration from septic-tank drain fields. A brief discussion
of each parameter and their relative importance and effect on seepage in the
area is given below.
Precipitation - The average m4~ual precipitation in the Lovell area is
6.60 inches; in 1988 total precipitation was 5.57 inches. Nearly half occurs
during the rronths of April, tJ".ay and June. The average annual precipitation at
Basin, south of the area, is 6.43 inches; long-term variations (1899-1988) are
a low of 2.63 inches in 1902 and a high of 11.09 inches in 1924. In 1988 total
precipitation was 6.86 inches. Potential recharge from precipitation during
the irrigation season is small, about 3 inches, and is about 10 percent of the
total applied for irrigation. Based on "t-lre size of the study area f about 3000
acres, nearly 750 acre-feet are available for recharge.
Underflow - Underflow into the terrace gravels is insignificant. Foster
Gulch has dissected the terrace less than 1 mile upgradient from the project
area and has created a discharge area. Bedrock. to the south on Highway 32
fonns a ground-water divide, further restricting underfl~.
2-6
Overland Runoff - Runoff from the low hills south of the project area re
sults from stann events and snc:wrelt. However, the water is intercepted by the
canals and drains and conducted out of the area before it effects the ground
water levels in the terrace.
Discharge from Bedrock Aquifers - Discharge from bedrock aquifers into the
terrace is probably small and can not be evaluated without eh'"}?ensive test
drilling and mapping.
leakage from Canals - Leakage fre n the irrigation canals is the secondary
source of recharge to the terrace gravels. The water levels in the cana 1 CL'1d
the length of time the canal contains wate~ are the main factors effecting
leakage. The main distribution system for the Elk-Lovell Canal includes lined
and unlined canals and laterals. The secondary distribution system includes
lined and unlined ditches and gated pipe, and ditches used for both irrigation
and return flow. The amount of vlater in the canals is not rreasured in the pro
ject area. However, the Wyoming State Engineer maintains discharge records for
the Elk-Lovell Canal diversion point on the Shoshone Hi ver .
Measurement of leakage from the canals would require detailed rroni toring
of canal flaw as it enters and leaves the area and at each diversion point on
the canal. It would be labor intensive and expensive and the amount of leakage
might be less than the accuracy of ~asurement. Leakage could also be esti
mated by rronitoring a series of observation wells installed in the canal and
installed parallel and perpendicular to the canals for at least one water year.
For this study, canal leakage is estimated to range from 1 to 2 cfs or 720 to
1440 acre-feet per year.
Irrigation - Irrigation is the main source of recharge to the terrace de
posits. The amount of recharge from irrigation depends on several factors in
cluding: irrigation methods used; irrigation frequency, duration and am:mnti
2-7
irrigated area, crop types, and cropping patterns i return flCMs i available ir
rigation water; consumptive use~ and soil thickness and permeability.
Irrigation methods: The only irrigation method used in the area is flocd
irrigation. Water is diverted from the main canal to unlined and concrete
lined laterals, then diverted to individual irrigation systems using unlined
and concrete-lined ditches. Final distribution is through lined and unlined
di tches and gated irrigation pipe. Al though the entire area is leveled for
flood irrigation, sprinkler irrigation systems would be more water efficient.
Irrigation frequency, duration and amount: Irrigation frequency depends
on water availabli ty, the crop types, and the weather conditions. The duratiorL
and amount of irrigation not only depends on water availablity and weather
conditions, but also depend on soil penneability and the land slope.
Irrigated area, crop types and cropping patterns: The amount of irrigated
area was estinated from data compiled by the SCS, from data maintained at the
ASCS office in Basin and at the Wyoming State Engineer's office in Cheyenne.
The total irrigated area in the Elk-Lovell Irrigation District is 15,500 acres.
The irrigated acreage for the Lovell part of the Irrigation District, called
the Lovell Terrace, is 10 ,800 acres. The irrigated acreage on the Lovell
Bench, which is part of the Lovell Terrace, is about 2440 acres. Crop types
and cropping patterns data for the Elk-Lovell Irrigation District for 1982 were
compiled by the SCS. Data for 1988 were adjusted to account for increased
production of sugar beets in the area. The crop types and cropping patterns on
the Lovell Bench are based on the ratio of the irrigated area on the Lovell
Bench with the total irrigated area in the Elk-Lovell Irrigation District.
These estimates have large variations awing to the yearly changes in cropping
patterns.
Return flows: Return flOltJ of irrigation water is to the drains on the
Lovell Bench and to y..Taste water channels to the Globe Canal at the eage on G'1e
2-8
bench. The arrount of return flovv has not been measured but probably is signif
icant. Some of the area is water logged owing to pcx::>r drainage.
Available irrigation water: The aTIDunt of irrigation water used by the
Elk-Lovell Canal water users was estiwated from diversion records maintained by
the Wyoming State Engineer's District office in Byron. The total amount of
water used by the irrigation district is actually less than the amount of water
diverted to the canal from the Shoshone River, but t.1te arrDlIDt of return flaw at
the end of the canal is not measured. Therefore the estimate is the maximum
p::>ssible water applied. The total 96,500 acre-feet was diverted in 1987 and
104,900 acre-feet in 1988. The amount of water available for irrigation during
the two-year period ranged from 6.2 to 6.8 feet per year.
Consumptive use: Consurnpti ve water use was estimated from SCS data (SCS,
1970 and 1974). The consumptive use ranges from 17 inches for small grains to
more than 26 inches for alfalfa and sugar beets. Consurnpti ve use for water
logged areas was estimated to be nearly the same as lake evaporation for the
area, 35 inches per year • Consumptive use for idle areas was estlinated to be
the same as for small grains and assumes shallow water-table conditions.
Soil thickness and perrreability: These data are available from the SCS
but have not been used for this study.
An accurate determination of recharge to the terrace deposits by irriga
-tion would require a detailed, labor intensive, and expensive study. It would
require measuring canal flOll, metering selected irrigated areas, rreasuring
evapotranspiration, installing observation wells, and rronitoring water-level
changes in the wells for at least one water year. However rough estimates of
potential recharge from irrigation can be made using available data which de
fine the total irrigated land on the Elk-Lovell Irrigation District, on the
Lovell Terrace, and on the lovell Bench; the crop types, cropping patterns on
2-9
the Lovell Terrace; the total amount of water available for use by the canal
subscribers; and consumptive water use. The following table summarizes the
land use, crop tyT€ illid cropping patterns for the Elk-Lovell Irrigation
District which includes the Lovell Bench. The table also includes estimates of
the arrount of water available for irrigation, the effective precipitation, and
conswuptive use data for the different crop tl~s. The data generated in this
t~le are used later for t~e water budget
Crop Type
Alfalfa Pasture
Developed
Smrrnary of Irrigated Land, Crop Types, Available lrrigation Water, and Consumptive Water Use
for the Lovell Bench
Total Irrigated Acreage Estirrated Water for Selected Crops Available on on Lovell Terrace Lovell Bench
+ * Lovell I IDvell%'# For From Terrace Bench Irrigation Pree.
Years Ann.
1982 1988 1988 1987 1988 Aver.
(Acres) (Acre-feet) 2320 2010 454 2497 3087 114
750 750 169 930 1149 42 Waterlogged 2040 2040 461 0 0 115
Corn 1580 1500 339 1864 2305 Sugar Beets 830 1300 294 1617 1999 Pinto Beans 1100 1000 226 1243 1537 Barley 1400 1400 316 1738 2149 Wheat 100 100 23 127 156 Oats 280 300 68 374 462 Idle 400 400 90 0 0
Totals 10800 10800 2440 8293 9757
@
+
Consumptive use data from SCS (1970 and 1974) •
Irrigated acreage on Lovell Terrace fram SCS (1982).
85 74 56 79
6 17 22
610
Estimated@ Consumptive Water Use
F t Acre-ee Feet
26.3 995
25.2 355 35.0 1344 17.9 506 26.4 647 16.9 318 17.5 461 17.5 34 17.5 99 17.5 131
4890
* Acreage on Lovell Terrace adjusted to reflect increased sugar beet production.
%
#
Acreage on Lovell Bench is 23 percent of total acreage on Lovell Terrace.
Arrount of water used on Lovell Bench prorated by the ratio of the water diverted by the Elk-lovell Canal and the amount of land irrigated.
2-10
Septic Tanks - The effects of infiltration from septic systems on recharge to
the aquifer are insignificant vJhen compared to the arrount of irrigation in the
area. The residential areas on the Lovell Bench in the rrown of Lovell are
served by t.he Lovell sewer system. The rural areas outside of the TOv\ITl are on
septic systems. Only eight septic systems occur within 500 feet of the edge of
the terrace. PJ. though they are are upgradient and west of Lovell, their contri
bution to recharge to the terrace deposits is ll1significant. The eight homes
probably contribute less than 1700 gallons per day to the ground-water system.
Movement of water in the terrace deposits
Movement of water in the terrace deposits is effected by the geologic
frarrework or pll..1.wing system of the aquifer. The best \AJay to rreasure rrovement
in the system is to define the };X)tentiorretric surface, the hydraulic gradient,
water-level changes, and locations of recharge and discharge areas.
Water-level measurements in wells and drains in the Lovell Bench were made
at the end of the irrigation season (September 11-29, 1989), when water levels
should have been the highest. The rreasurements were made in conjtmction with
field mapping of the seeps and springs along the edge of the terrace. The dis
tribution of drains and canals was also napped to determine recharge and dis
charge boundaries. Water-well records filed with the Wyoming State Engineer
were used as a base to identify water wells in the area. Selected wells were
inventoried and water-level measurements made to define the water surface in
the area. Other Hells identified during the well inventory were also rreasured.
Many of the wells were constructed or sealed in a manner to prevent water-level
measurements; some well owners would not allow measurements. Drains and canals
were field checked and plotted on air photos of the area. In addition, selec
ted well and hare owners near the edge of the Lovell Bench were interviewed to
determine historic water-level fluctuations.
2-11
Potentiometric Surface - The potentiometric surface map (Figure 2-1) of
the terrace deposits is sub-parallel to the tOjX)graphic surface. It shCJWs that
movement of water in the terrace is generally to the east-northeast toward SaT1d
Draw but deflects northward toward the edge of the terrace Lorth of Lane l2.
The effect of recharge from the canals is not obvious and probably is small.
However, the effect of discharge to the drains on L"'l.e potentiometric surface is
noticable but does not significantly alter the overall shape of the water sur-
face. The water-level contours begin to change direc:ion within 1000 feet of
the edge of the terrace and became sub-parallel to the terrace edge. More de
tailed definition of the potentiometric surface near ~~e edge of the terrace
would require several test holes along and north of Lane 12, water-level mea
surements in more of the existing wells, and a detailed water-surface profile
in the drains.
Hydraulic Characteristics The hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer
needed to estimate ground-water velocity and flow are the hydraulic gradient
and conducti vi ty , the aquifer thickness, and the aquifer porosity. Test
drilling and aquifer tests were beyond the scope of this project, therefore
these aquifer characteristics were estimated from tables relating rock type
with hydraulic characteristics (Driscoll, 1986); hydraulic conductivity ranges
from 2000 to 20,000 gpd/ft2 and porosity is about 0.25. None of the water
'\o\7ells on the Lovell Bench penetrated the full aquifer thickness, but based on
average well depth the thickness is estimated to be between 20 and 25 feet.
The saturated thickness is probably between 15 and 20 feet during the peak 0= the irrigation season and less than 10 feet in winter. The saturated thickness
along Sand Draw is probably less than 10 feet all year. The p:>tentiorretric Trap
shows that the hydraulic gradient varies from 20 to 30 ft/mi.
2-12
Based on these assumptions, estimates of flow velocity range from about 4
to 40 feet per day. The arrount of flow to Sand Draw may range from atout,
400,000 gpd (0.6 cfs or 435 acre-feet) to 6,000,000 gpd (9 cfs or 6,500 acre
feet) per mile of aquifer ,,"idth. The a~"'Uifer widt."'i. along Scmd Dra'il is Ie::: s
t.han 3 miles, therefore discharge from the aquifer may range from 1,300 to
19,600 acre-feet. The lower limit for hydraulic conductivity is probably lov;
and a better estimate for the lower limit of discharge is probably 3 cfs or
2,100 acre-feet.
Water-level fluctuations - The frequency, magnitude and causes of water
level fluctuations are parameters needed to understand the operation of the
aquifer system. The frequency and magnitude of fluctuations are the easiest to
measure, but the causes of the fluctuations are also important parameters.
Short-term or daily water-level fluctuations were not measured for this
study. They probably are of small magnitude and their overall effect on seep
age is insignificant. They are caused by pumping, irrigation patterns and fre
quency in adjacent fields, evapotranspiration from phreatophytic plants and
shallow ground-water areas, and weather phenanena such as precipitation and
barometric changes.
The main source of seasonal and annual water-level fluctuations on the
IDvell Bench is irrigation. The magnitude of the fluctuations was estimated
fran interviews with well owners and from data collected in the area by the
Water-:Resources Division of the u.S. Geological Survey. Well owners indicated.
that shallow wells (10 to 20 feet deep) are dry or produce insufficient water
for la~n irrigation, livestock, or domestic uses until irrigation starts each
spring. They also indicate that water levels decline to their lowest point by
mid-winter. In some years, water levels are at or near surface during parts of
the irrigation season. A major factor effecting water levels is the duration
2-13
of irrigation and the amount of area irrigated. The U.S. Geological SUl.\Tey
data indicate at least 7 feet of fluctuation, local residents indicate more.
Long-term water level fluctuations are caused by major climatic changes
such as drought f high rainfall, changes in cropping patterns, or deepening old
drains or construction of new drains. None of these have been nonitored and
probably are insignificant. Long-term records are not available for wells on
the Lovell Bench. Hcwever, the U.S. Geological Survey (Cassidy and others,
1989) have measured water levels in one well on the Lovell Bench, one well on
the Powell Terrace west of Foster Gulch and one well on the alluvium of the
Shoshone River east of Sand Draw from June, 1988 to April, 1989. The data are
given in the follaNing table:
'Water-level Data in Selected Observation Wells
Location
NWSENE Sec. 24 T56N R96W
i~SW Sec. 29 T56N R96W
sw Sec. 01 T56N R95W
Well CMner
Haskins
Moncur
Jellison
Date
7-13-88 9-30-88
12-14-88 4-13-89
6-18-88 9-30-88
12-14-88 4-13-89
7-14-88 9-30-88
12-14-88 4-13-89
Water Depth
5.6 10.4 12.2 12.8
4.9 5.4
10.3 6.8
7.5 8.7
11.7 12.2
Long-term \,.,rater-level rneasurerrents have also been made in wells on the
Emblem Bench, SQItle 20 miles south of the area by the U. S. Geological Survey
(Ringen, 1973). The geohydrology of the terraces is sirnilar and the data indi-
cate a similar range of water level fluctuations.
2-14
Discharge
Ground-water discharges from the Lovell Terrace by underflow to Sand Draw
and from seeps and springs alo~g the edge of the terrace. Ground water is also
discharged to drains canpleted in the terrace, to wells, to bedrock aquifers 1
and by evapotranspiration.
Underflow from terrace - Ground-water underflow from the Lo\Tell Bench is
rna in 1 y to the Lovell Lakes and to Sand Draw and probably is large. Specific
dar..a definirg the hydraulic parameters are not available. Ground-water under
flow from the bench is also the major cause of seepage into the Globe Canal.
If underflow to Sand Draw could be increased, seepage into the canal vlould de
crease • Conversely, if the underflow is decreased, seepage to the canal 'WOuld
increase. The arrount of underflo.v to Sand Draw was not measured directly but
is estimated to range fran about 3 cfs (2,170 acre-feet) to nore than 20 CIS
(14,500 acre-feet).
Discharge from wells - Discharge from wells is small. All of the water
wells canpleted in the terrace deposits are used for danestic , livestock and
lawn-irrigation uses. None of the wells are used for major agricultural irri
gation. The amount of discharge is estimated at less than 100,000 gpd (0.2
cfs a.1:x>ut 145 acre-feet). This is based on an estimate of the nurriber of wells
presently being used on the Bench and assuming that water use is about 2,000
gpd per well.
Discharge from seeps and springs - Discharge from seeps and springs along
the terrace edge is the main cause of seepage into the Globe Canal. Seepage
occurs in each gully that cuts the terrace and although it seldom occurs as
free flow in the gullies, it creates lush phreatophytic and hydrophytic vegeta
tion in the gullies. Field mapping did not find the contact of the saturated
gravel deposits with the underlying bedrock in any of the gullies. HQV.lever,
2-15
the mapping indicated that the material in the gullies consists of a rrelange of
reworked terrace and bedrock materials. The contact of "b"l.e terrace deposits
and the shale was usually 15 to 20 feet higher than the saturated zones on the
benches and at the ITOUth of the gullies. This implies that grouJ1d water enters
the gully at some point near the head of the gully where the contact of the
gravel and underlying shale is covered. The water then Troves through the allu
vium in the gully as underflovv. When the \vater reaches the sl1.IDlp areas at the
mouth of the gully, it enters the slmnped areas and surfaces on top of same of
the slumps and saturates t-..hem. The water then flCM7s along the top of the slump
and at a lOW' poir..t overtops the sl1.IDlp. Most of the slUI'l'ps have been saturated
at some p:::>int in time. Seepage is nearly ubiquitous along much of the terrace.
The exceptions are at the base of some of the gullies where "arid" type vegeta
tion predominates I and locally for short distances upstream fran the gully.
The arrount of seepage was estimated by making a series of flo.v rreasure
rnents along the course of the canal just after diversion to the canal was
stopped. These rreasurements indicated at least 300 gpn (gal/min) seepage from
the intersection of Lane 12 and the Globe Canal to Nevada St. Canal flOW' below
Nevada Street was greater than the rreasuring equiprent would handle. Seepa.ge
into the Globe Canal was rreasured in mid-october, 1989 and exceeded 1 cfs.
However, seepage was still affected by active irrigation on the Bench. Seepage
measured in late Novenber was about 0.1 cfs.
The reach of the Globe Canal in wvell which is effected by seepage from
the Lovell Bench is about 1/2-mile long. Seepage from the Lovell Bench can be
estimated from the follOW'ing assumptions. Irrigation-season seepage through
Lovell is about 1 cfs and lasts for about 5 rronths. Seepage for the rest of
the year is aOOut 0.1 cfs. The total reach along the Lovell Bench is about 3
miles. 'rherefore, as much as 2040 acre-feet may seep into the canal each year.
2-16
The canal was examined at low flCM from Garfield Street to the west end of
town. The base of the canal consists of a gravel substrate, cemented with a
clay and caliche matrix. The cemented gravel was excavated at several loca
tions and indicated that the cemented gravel extended to a depth of more than
one foot. The banks are heavily overgrown with vegetation and locally are
covered with thick layers of silt and/or a clay-bound pebble gravel. Active
seepage occurred along at least 50 percent of the canal and active
slumps occurred along much of the area.
Discharge to bedrock aquifers - Discharge to bedrock aquifers is negli
gible and would be difficult to estimate without detailed mapping, test
drilling, and geophysical logging.
Discharge to drains in terrace - Ground-water discharge to the drains from
the terrace occurs throughout the year but is mask~ by irrigation return flow
during the surrmer. There are three major drains and numerous lateral drains
(Figure 2-1). Flaw in the drains was not rreasured. The arrount of discharge
varies with the season and is wholly dependent on irrigation. The maximum dis
charge occurs in late S'llrriIer at the peak of the irrigation season. Discharge
during the irrigation season is probably quite variable owing to return flaw
but slowly declines at to a winter low flow. Although flow rreasurernent in the
drains would be laror intensive and expensive, it is estimated to range from 1
to 3 cfs or 720 to 2170 acre-feet.
Evapotranspiration - Evapotranspiration (consumptive use) occurs during
the growing season and is related to temperature, wind conditions, humidity,
solar radiation, depth to water, and plant types. It can be estimated using
several methods, the most accurate is by using 1 ysimeters and other similar
equipnent. For this study, the evapotranspiration was estimated from data
published by the u.S. Soil Conservation Service.
2-17
These data estimate the approx~te water use for crops in an average year
and were used to develop a water budget. The main crops grown in the Lovell
Bench are alfafa, corn, sugar beets r beans, pasture grass and small grain. The
amount of evapotransporation for the different crops are listed in the table on
Page 2-10. Evapotranspiration from the waterlogged areas is nearly equal to
lake evaporation in the area and is about 35 inches per year. Evaporation from
nonirrigated fields in the area is estimated to be the same as that for small
grains, 1 7 inches per year . Especially \vhere the water table is high.
Total cons'l.lITptive use is estimated to be arout 4890 acre-feet.
WATER BUDGEI'
The water budget is defined as the sum of the water in the system. It
can be expressed mathematically as:
Recharge = Discharge ~ What happens in the system (change in storage)
The components of recharge are:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Underflaw Precipitation From bedrock aquifers OVerland nmoff Canals Irrigation
Total The components of discharge are:
1. UnderflCM 2. To bedrock aquifers 3. v~ells
4. Drains 5. Evapotranspiration
Total 6. Seepage (difference between recharge
and discharge)
Minirm:rrn
720 8300
9720
2170
720
7925
1845
The change in storage is negligible for this study.
2-18
o 750
o o
0 145
4890
Maximum
Acre-feet
1440 9800
11990
14480
2170
21685
(9695)
If all assumptions made in determining recharge and discharge, seepage
v,ould be the difference between recharge and discharge. The aITDunt of seepage
estimated for the canal was 2440 acre-feet.
GEOHYDROICGIC MAPPING
Iocation and extent of seeps, springs and slumping
Seeps and springs along the Globe Canal were mapped in September, 1989.
The m pping indicated that the seeps and springs were inherently related to
slumping occurring in the area. Several methods were used to enhance the map
ping process. They were false-color infrared and black and white air photos,
top::>graphic maps, and information from other studies.
Infrared photography was examined at the Soil Conservation Service office
in Iovell. The photos aided in field mapping of phreatophytes and other water
dependent vegetation but the scale was to small for detailed mapping. In addi
tion, the photos were flown in late June before the non-phreatophytic plants
were effected by drought conditions.
Black and white photos were examined at the Agricultural Stabilization and
Conservation Service office in Basin. Enlargerrents of the photos were used to
define the gullys where heavy vegetation occurred, to help identify the extent
of the slurnps and the phreatophytic vegetation, the location of the canals and
drains, the locations of wells, and locally, the contact of the gravel with the
bedrock.
Topographic maps were enlarged for plotting field data, for use as a base
map for the potentiometric surface, and for use as a base for the surveying.
The hydrophytic and phreatophytic vegetation mapping was completed in
three weeks in September, 1989. The mapping was not done to identify all of
the phreatophytic vegetation in the area, but to be used as a guide to locate
2-19
seepage. Several types of seeps and springs were identified. They were,
active point-source springs, active seeps, marshy and saturated ground on top
of t.he slumps, incipient seeps, and historic seeps.
t~pping along the canal indicate that slumping has occurred on G~e entire
reach since the canal has been in use. Evidence for this is canal misalign-
rrent, hurrm::x:::ky to}?09Yaphy, concave utMTard terrace surfaces, caliche encrusted
surfaces on the uphill sides of the terraces.
SumTIary of geohydrologic mappinq
Seeps were mapped along the reach of the Globe Canal from its intersection with Lane 12 to Old Highway 310. 'The mapping consisted of making a general examination of the condition of the upper bank of the canal, measuring geologic sections where outcrops are available, location of active and inactive slumps, saturated slumps, and elevations of water levels. The reach was subdivided into 5 sections. 'The first from Lane 12 to the west edge of the Town of lovell. The second from the west edge of town to Shoshoni Street. The third from Shoshoni to Nevada streets. 'The fourth from Nevada to Garfield streets. And finally from Garfield Street to Old Highway 310.
The first stretch contains numerous slump areas and two groves or thickets of willa.v, cottonwood, and Russian olive trees. The upper face of the terrace is for the rrost part, covered by a thin veneer of soil and heavily overgrown with vegetation. Each gully that dissects the terrace contains abundant vegetation to sane p:>int upslope indicating groundwater discharge. Very few of the gullies contain free fla-/ing water and sane of the gullies contain II arid" type vegetation in their lower reach. Slumps OCcurril'1g between the gullies and the tops of the slumps are usually saturated downstream from each gully. The saturated slumps are usually overtopped at sane p:>int and the water flows down the bank and into the canal.
Station 1-2: Gully south of intersection of Lane 12 and Globe Canal flows about 20 gpm and contains several springs and seeps (Bischoff Spring) . Several areas of cattails occur on terrace slope above the springs and gully. A water-table p:>nd (the land owner reports that the pond goes dry at the end of the irrigation season) has been developed in a gravel pit at the head of the gully. A steep escarpment on the south side (uphill) of the canal, just east of Station 1 is covered with artificial fill for erosion control, the contact of the gravel and under lying shale is covered.. Abundant phreatophytic vegetation (wild rose, asparagus, Russian olive, rrountain ash, sloe plum, willow and gooseberry) covers the hillside about 300 feet east of Station 1. A small spring, about 5 gpm and two small seeps occur about 350 feet east of Station 1.
Station 2-3: Fran station 2 to 3 lovI benches (slump blocks) occur between the canal and the top of the terrace. These benches are partly saturated and have abundant cattail, horsetail (joint-grass), barnyard grass, and water herrlock. Small areas on top of the benches are saturated. Large grove of cottonwood, willow and Russian olive trees at end of Station 3.
2-20
Station 3-4: Outcrop near Station 3. Bench belON outcrop saturated and water overtops the slump al:::out 60 feet downstream.
Description
Gravel, medium to coarse, clayey to silty, some sand, clay content decreases upward. Shale, light gray to tan, silty, sorre sandy silt. Covered Base of steep slope Covered, top of slump Eclge of canal to edge of slump.
Interval
31-35 26-31 21-26
21 11-21 0-11
Distance
125-128 122-125 112-122
77-112 34- 49
Station 4-5: Seepage is nearly ubiquitous along canal between stations. Large patches of cattails, wild rose and other hydrophytes on top of bench with some willONs. Much of area on top of benches is waterlogged. Sane areas have a hard caliche (calcium carbonate) crust developed on the surface. Scarps on the face of the terrace indicate as much as 7 feet of slumping. Outcrops suitable for measured sections were not found in this section.
Station 5-7 Upper part of small gully near station 5 contains dense vegeta-tion, but is dry at base. Slump surface west of gully covered with phreatophytes. Steep slope at terrace edge to east of gully terminated by fresh slump face; slump consists of a heterogeneous mixture of clay, silt and gravel. Top of old bench slump saturated and partly covered with vegetation, part of slump has rross-covered caliche crust with water standing on top.
Description
Top of bench. Gravel, rredium to coarse (rrostly 1/16 to 1/2-inch diarreter) ,
clayey to silty, serre sand, clay content decreases upward. Shale, thin-bedded, light to brownish gray to tan, sare rusty
brown, silty, dips 100 WSW. Covered Base of steep slope Break in slope (top of slump), ground saturated. Edge of canal
Interval
40
28-40
17-28 15-17
15 10 o
Seepage or heavy vegetation occurs near the head of many of the gullies but they are dry at the rrouth. HONever, the slumps which occur at either side of the gullies are covered with vegetation and usually are saturated and have overbank flON to the canal. The large gully west of the new lovell water tank is dry with abundant sagebrush and other dry land plants; two perched water zones occur on the top of the slump but the area beU"leen the wet zones and the canal are dry.
Station 7-8: The bench from the gully west of the water tank to water tank is saturated and overbank flow occurs over rrost of the reach. An active seep occurs below the water tower at the base of an old roadway from the canal to the water tank. The gully vlest of the vJater tower is wet in the upper part with heavy vegetation from the rrouth of gully to the canal. Slumps on both sides of gully have active seeps. A goc::d exposure of the gravel/shale contact occurs between the gully and water tower.
2-21
Station 7-8 (Cont.) Description
Gravel, medium to coarse, locally base of gravel is tilted, probably the result of slumping.
Shale, grey to brownish gray, dips about 50 w. Covered., slope ,.v-ash from top of slump to oottom of shale. Slump or top of bench I Steep slope from canal to lower edge of bench
Interval
35-40 25-35 70-25 15-20 0-15
The gully next to the water tower and the area from this gully to the gully at end of Kansas Street are dry. The area has some phreatophytic vegetation and SOIre slUl:nping has occurred near the rrouth of the gully. The gully at the -end of Kansas Street has a perennial spring-fed stream. The gully is large and extends arout 1000 feet to the south. The spring at the head of the gully has been developed with a 10-inch pipe; a small pond occurs just above the spring. Springflow was greater than 150 gpn. A secondary seep occurs in a tributary gully to the Vlest and several areas of dense grass occur along the reach of the gully • Probably the result of underflcw in the gully. A srrall saturated area occurs at the TI'Outh of the gully at the base of the terrace. The area below the seep is dry.
Station 8-9 Only three active seeps occur between the gully at the end of Kansas and Shoshoni streets. One has been developed as a dug well 8 feet in diarreter and about 4 feet deep. Much sltnnping has occured and rrost of the slumps which do not have active seeps are covered with a relatively hard caliche crust. The soil under this crust is slightly damp to rroist. This implies tha.t the area had active seepage prior to residential developrrent on the terrace and that farm irrigation is the rrain source of seepage water. When development occured, irrigation and subsequent seepage decreased. The contact of the gravel and the shale is well exposed in the Shoshoni Street road cut just. below the water tcwer. The shale dips slightly to the north and the contact is discordant.
Station 9-10 A small seep occurs near Shoshoni Street but additional seeps were not ide..l1.tified between Shoshoni and '£\10ntana streets. A broad bench begins near a srrall footbridge halfway between Shoshoni and Montana streets and extends to Montana Street. Two benches occur between Montana and Nevada streets. Large cottonwood trees occur on the bench at the rrouth of a gully near the footbridge and at the rrouth of a larger gully at the end of Montana Street. Neither gully contains vegetation indicative of seepage. A small seep occurs on the upper bench near the rrouth of the gully at the end of Montana Street. Only four small seeps were identified between Montana and Nevada streets but heavy phreatophytic vegetation occurs on both benches along much of the reach. Neither bench is saturated.
Station 10-11 The slump block east of Nevada Street is saturated from Nevada Street to a small gully at the end of Washington Street. The saturated zone is 50 to 75 feet wide and at least 200 feet long. The saturated areas range from from cattail swamps with free-standing water to areas containing dense hydrophytic vegetation and occasionally free water to h1..llrtITOCky, caliche covered areas with flowing water. The amount of saturation decreases to barely moist at the end of Washington Street. Active seeps were not identified between Washington and Lincoln streets
2-22
Station 10-11 (Cont.) but the top and sides of the benches are nearly covered with a hard caliche crust indicating previous seepage. The large gully at Lincoln Street is an irrigation return flow channel ~mich has considerable erosion in the gully. A 5 gpn seep occurs about halDtVay between the top of the terrace and the canal. From this channel to Garfield Street n1UItiple beilches occur. Host of them are saturated and locally vegetation is heavy. Seepage into the canal occurs along rrost of this reach and several areas have active slumping into the canal. One of the land owners on top of the terrace has developed a 10-gpm spring on top of G~e terrace near Garfield Street.
Station 11-12 A small spring has been developed on the east side of Garfield Street. About 50 feet from Garfield an irrigation return flow charmel was flawing an estimated 200 gpm. Fram Garfield to Old Highway 310 several active seep.> and slumps were identified. The canal appears to be on a more gravelly substrate and it appears that considerable leakage occurs from the canal.
Survey notes and station descriptions
Station 1. Center line of Globe Canal and Lane 12.
Station 2. Top of vegetation.
Station 3. Top of vegetation. Irrigation return drain 40 feet west. South of west bank of drain canal.
Station 4.
Station 5.
Station 6.
Station 7.
Station 8.
Station 9.
Center line of return flow irrigation channel.
Top of slump-saturated.
Small gully, bottom of slump.
Fence line at top of vegetation, alfalfa, heavy vegetation.
Gully, return flavv channel, flavving • Saturated soil.
No description.
Station 10. Whi te tail trees, west end, top of slump. Trees are cottonwocx1 and Russian olive with tall grasses.
Station 11. Gully at east end to trees, top of vegetation, outcrop 200 feet to south (east?).
Station 12. Contact of gravel and shale, west side of gully. Old station 4 and 200 feet from gas pipeline, station 13.
Station 13. Interface between vegetation and dry bank in head of gully. Base of water
Station 14.
Station 15.
Station 16.
Station 17.
Station 18.
level in terrace defX)si ts (discharge poir.t) , next to gas line.
Top of vegetation at fence line.
West end of large slump, top of vegetation.
Top of vegetation in center of small draw, very wet.
Interface with water table in small gully.
Srrall draw (Station 17) top of slump. West end of another slump.
2-23
Station 19. Top of vegetation in gully (terracehvater table interface. Large spring in gully 20 feet west, large slumps on both side of gully.
Station 20. West of center of gully, near top of vegetation. Near east end of series of slumps.
Station "" L..i.
Station 22.
Station 23.
Station 24.
Contact of gravel c.nd sha.le.
-do-
-do-
Fence line, top edge of slump, top of vegetation.
Station 25. 200 feet east of fence line. Interface with water table (small stand Clf willcws). East of small gully. 'Turnout on canal, old station 6. Top OJ slump saturated , active seepagea and slumping.
Station 26. Base of SInall draw, VIet on bottom, some dry area to west. West end of large bench, 40 ft 'ttlide x 100 foot + long, created by slumping. Large cottonwcx:rl, willow, and Russian olive trees below bench.
Sta.tion 26A. Reshot.
Station 27. stations slumping
Station 28. part be 28. Old
Station 29.
Station 30.
Top of vegetation, top of slump. Heavy brush and trees between 26 and 27. Sagebrush belaY' saturated areas. Some evidence of in this area. Area 100 foot + wide and forms 2 benches.
West of old gravel road to water to\Ver. Active spring, may in discharge point for extensive slump area between stations 26 and
road may also alter flow paths of seepage in gully to east.
No data.
Top of slump (saturated) at fence line on east side of ooralls.
Station 31. Contact of gravel with shale, 100 feet east of station 30. Top part of slump (level part) ends 100 feet to east.
Station 32. West end of large seep and west of small gully. Area from sta-tion to Russian olive trees, 30 x 90 feet, ~s saturated and water is running into canal in at least 5 places (5 gpm?).
Station 33. East of small gully and at west end of slump area. Moist sur-face roc>ist, becoming saturated 10 feet to east. 40 feet above canal.
Station 34. East end of small seep area associated with small spring fed stream, 100 feet to canal. 30 feet downhill soil dry with sagebrush.
Station 35. At break (mouth of) in gully. Top of vegetation, saturated below but dry 30 feet below station to canal. 50 feet to small stream. East of small stream and from base of terrace to 50 feet abc>ve canal, ver.f dense vegetation including willow I Russian olive, sloe plum and tall grasses, SOIre cattail and speannint. Area from dense vegetation to canal covered with sagebrush and rabbit brush, occasionally tall grass but ground not wet.
Triangulation Station F. Top of terrace. Station used as TP for wells and other locations on top of terrace. Gravel on surface. Prism. turned upside down.
Station 36. East of sma.ll stream, saturated slump area, 25 x 30 feet, dry be-low saturated area. Very dense vegetation betvleen this slump and fence near station 37. At east end of vegetation is large slump which extends east to Shoshoni St.
2-24
Station 43. From station 42 to 43, mostly dry with some slumping over entire reach. At least 2 benches occur and start aOOut 15 feet east of a large dry gully (cottonwood trees at base of gully). The upper bench is saturated for rrost of the distance from station 43 to Nevada Street, the lower bench is only locally saturated. Fre<;ruently the better exposed side hills in this area have irregularly shar:;ed vegetation and rroist areas indicative of capillarity. The upper terrace is saturated for 100 feet tD the next gully.
Station 44. A small gully drains the upper terrace, about 1 gpm flow. A very small arrount of seepage into the canal occurs from station 44 to Nevada Street.
Station 45. Contact of grave with shale in roadcut o~ east side to Nevada Street.
Station 46. A broad, rabbitbrush covered surface, gently slopes for about 75 feet frarn the top of the terrace to an abrupt escarpment between Nevada Street and station 46. A large 50 x 30 foot saturated slump occurs at the base of the esca.rprrent. The elevation at this station is at the top of the vegetation.
Station 47. Between two stands of willows on top of a broad slump surface extending from station 46 to 47. The area is saturated from the canal to the station.
Station 48. At break in slope at top of large slUJI"q?ed area. Area covered wi th horsetail to 5 to 8 feet above slump. Gravel talus pile occurs on parts of slope above slump.
Station 49. At east end of open area and at top of vegetation and slump. Top of slump saturated and marshy, Cottonwood, Russian olive, and Chinese elm abundant. Area from 25 to 100 feet east of station 49 not saturated and has a steeper slope; abundant vegetation and tall grass. Small gully crosses this area.
Station 50. Spring flowing at about 5 gpm, not at gravel/shale contact, total seepage area is 10 feet wide. Water cress in depression below spring indicates year round flaw. Small gully 30 feet east has lush vegetation but is not boggy, tops of slumps on both sides of gully are saturated. Large dry flat area at base of gully next to canal, may be secondary slump at base of main slump.
Station 51. Irrigation return channel 25 feet east of station. Large swampy area extends for some distance to east, open area for 50 feet the dense impenetrable.
Station 52. East end of swampy area and at edge of dense vegetation. Area at base of tree is waterlogged and is 6 feet east and 2 feet belovv station.
Station 53. At top of largae slurrp area, may in part be man made. To west is a 12-foot errbankment up to top of hill. Large return flow channel 50 feet west of station. No water at top of slump, covered vvith gravel. Active slump at edge of canal, seepage occurs along a 30-foot section.
Station 54. Developed spring consists of 2, 4-inch diameter, PVC pipes, one goes south at least 50 feet, the other 50 feet east. Pipes are near base of gravel. Spring flow is 10 gpm. Spring is on a man-made terrace on top of til.e slump block.
2-25
REHABILITATION OR REMEDIATION OF SEEPAGE
This section discusses various t~~s of potential rehabilitation and seep
age remediation r.:Etl1ods. It only addresses locations and construction rrethcx:3s.
Costs and economics of the system, hOd G. solution or solutions Vlould effect or
impact the i.Inrrediate and/or surrounding area, and identification of resp:::>nsit·le
parties are discussed in Section 3 of this report.
REMEDIATION ON TOP OF TERRACE
Deep, buried drain at or below bedrock between local irrigated areas and
the edge of terrace. This would be a continuous, trencher-installed cornbina
tion perforated pipe, gravel-filled geotextile drain. It would be installed
along Lane 12 fram Road 10 1/2 to Road 11 1/2, northward on Old highway 310
and then into a drain below the terrace.
Grout curtain to divert groundwater away from the edge of the terrace.
This would be at nearly the sane place but could hug the terrace more closely.
It would consist of a series of closely-spaced bedrock wells that are grouted
from bedrock to near surface. This would cause a ground water high and would
divert the water fram the present problem area to some point to the east.
Alter irrigation and/or cropping practices and patterns. This would range
fram no irrigation north of Lane 12 to growing crops such as small grain and
beans that require less water late the in growing season to changing irrigation
methods from flocxi irrigation to spriI',kler methods. If water costs in area
Here comparable to costs in other parts of the country, water use would
obviously decrease.
Relief wells to dewater areas effected by seepage and to recycle return
flow. This would require several large-diameter , high-capacity, proper 1 y-
2-26
spaced wells, adaptD1g the present irrigation systenl to accept the additional
water, and installing a larger conveyance system.
Deepen existing open drains, ~aintain lateral ~~-ains more efficiently,
install additional open drains 2.1ong Lane l~ to Sand dravi.
Combinations of the above.
REMEDIATION AT FACE OR BASE OF TEHRACE
Install ei thE. r piped drains or ll."1piped gravel drains near the top of the
slumped areas. They would be trencher-installed drains and consist of either
perforated pipe encased in a gravel-packed geotextile or just a gravel-packed
geotextile. Installation would require detailed test drilling on the tops of
the slumps and would require significant brush rerroval for installation. These
drains 'WOuld have to be tied into larger ITIO.ster drains that either are under
the canal or tie into existing drains.
Install horizontal, driven drains upslope in each of the problem areas.
The method would also require detailed test drillng and the drains would have
to be tied to other drains.
Selective draining of rna jor problem areas USL.,g one of the preceding
rrethods.
Install a cement-pipe, encased canal with a buried drain next to or below
the encased canal. Installation would require detailed test drilling and would
require significant brush rerroval for installation. These drains would have to
be tied into larger master drains that either are under the canal or tie into
existing drains.
Purchase the effected properties.
Combinations of the above.
2-27
SELECTED REFERENCES
Andre\vS, D.A., vI.G. Pierce and D.H. Eargle, 1947, Geologic map of tile Bighorn Basin, vVyoming and Hontana, showing terrace derX)sits iliiC physiOS'Yaphic features: u.S. Geol. Survey Oil and Gas Invest. Prelim. i'lap 71.
t?,lt;uJey, H.P. ('lnd W.D .. Criddle, 1950, D(::tenl-lini:t,~ \-;2t~r re-=:n~r,~nlt-~nts in irrigated areas from climatological and irrigation data: U. s. Soil Conserv. Se:::.-v .. , SCS-TP-96.
Cassidy, Earl, Myron Smalley and Steve Reiner, 1989, ~'Jater H.escurces of Bighorn County, tA.yoming: u. S. Geol. Survey Water Eesc. Inv. Rept. (in review) •
Cedergren, H.R., 1975, Drainage and dewatering: in Foundation and Engineering Handbcx:>k, H. F. v1interkorn and H .. Y. Fang, ed., VanNostrand-Heinhold, NY, NY , p. 221-243. -
Driscoll, F .G., 1986, Groundwater and Wells: Johnson Division, St. Paul, MN.
Kohler, M.A., and others, 1959, E-vaporation maps for the United S·tates: u.s. Weather Bur c Tech. Paper 37.
l/:Mry, M.E., H.vV". Lohman, and G.C. Lines, 1976~ Water resources of the Bighorn Basin, northwestern vJyoming: u.s. (',eol. Survey Hydrol. Invest. Atlas HA-512.
Mackin, J.H., 1936, Capture of Greybull River: Awer. Jour. Sci., 5th Ser., v. 31, p. 373-385
, 1937, Erosional Histor.! of the Big Horn Basin, VJyoming: Geol. Soc----:----iety Amer. Bull., v. 48, p. 813-894.
Heyers, J .S., 1962, Evaporation from the 17 western States, with a section on EvaJ;XJration Rates by T.J. Nordensen: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 272-D.
National Oceanic and Atrrospheric Administration, 1973, Monthly nonuals of temperature, precipitation, and heating and cooling days, 1941-70: U.S. Dept. Conmerce Publ., Clirnatography of the United States No. 81 (Wyoming).
Peterson, D.A., K.L. Mora, M.E. Lowry, and others, 1984, Hydrology of Area 51, Northern Great Plains and Rocky Mountain coal provinces, Wycming and Montana: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-resources Invest., Open-file Rept. 84-734.
Pierce, W.G., Compiler, 1978, Geologic map of the Cody 10 x 2
0 quadrangle,
northwestern Wyoming: u.s. Geol. Survey Misc. Field Studies Map MF-963.
Piteau, D.R. and Peckover, 1984, Rock-slope Engineering: in Landslides: Analysis and Control, R. Schuster and R. Krizek, eel.: U.S. Dept. Transp., Transp. Resc. Board, Natl. Resc. Council Pub. 176. --
Ringen, B.H., 1973, Records of ground-water levels in v.Jyoming, 1950-1970: Wyorning State EngL~eer' s Office, Wyoming vJater Planning PrO(j-raITl Report No. 13, 479 p.
Robinove, C.J. and R.R. Lru'lgford, 1963, Ceology and ground-water resources of the Greybull River-Dry Creek area, v-vyoming: u. S. Geol. Survey Water-supply Paper WSP 1596.
Sharp, J .C., G.M.M. Ley, and R. Sage, 1977, Pit Slope ~1anual, Chapter 4 -Groundwater: CANMEr (Canada Centre for Minearal and Energy Technology, former 1 y Mines Branch, Energy, Mines and Resources, Canada), CANMET REPORT 77-13, 240 p., November 1977
2-28
u.s. Soil Conservation Service, 1970, Irrigation Water Requirements: u.s. Dept. Agriculture, Soil Conserve Se~~., Engll1eering Dept., Technical Release No. 21 (Rev. 2).
, 1974, Irrigation Guide for Wyoming: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Soil Conserv. Serv., Casper, vJY, unnurrb. rept.
___ ..,.-_, 1982, Wyoming cooperative crop enterr?rise study, Elk-Lovell Canal Irrigation District, Big Hom County, Wyoming: U. S. Dept . Agriculture, Soil Conserv. Serv., Casper, WY, unnumb. rept.
_____ , 1987, Wycrning cooperative irrigation water-conservation study for Globe Canal Irrigation System, Big Hom County, Wyoming: U. S. Dept. Agriculture, Soil Con se rv . SerJ .. , Cas:per, T.ifI, unnurrb. rept.
~Vyorning State Engineer, 1989, Records at Ground-water appropriations: Wyo. State Eng., Unpub. ground-water data.
, 1989, Records of flow in the Elk-Lovell and Globe canals, 1987 and --...--,..-....,.-
1988 irrigation years: Wyo. State Eng., unpub. surface-water data.
I 1989, Plats of Elk-Lovell Irrigation District: lAJyo. State Eng., ----."...-Unpub. irrigation maps.
2-2
-C :::2
V
SECTION 3
SOLUTION ALTERNATIVES
INTRODUCTION
This section of the report presents five different project alternatives
which offer a solution to the current seepage problem. Each of these has
advantages, disadvantages, requirements and associated cost. These aspects
of each alternative will be discussed in this Section.
Before discussing each of the five drainage alternatives, however, the
philosophy with which the alternatives were developed will be explained.
Also, the limitations of the existing drain system within Lovell will be
discussed.
PHILOSOPHY OF ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT
The central theme in all solution alternatives is to prevent water and
sub-freezing air from coming in contact in the Globe Canal·s reach through
town. This applies to both seep water issuing from the hillside above the
canal as well as free flowing water in the canal. There are practical,
economical and technical limits to the degree to which this air/water
separation can be achieved.
Each drainage alternative was assembled with two main objectives.
First: Divert all flowing water from the Globe Canal upstream of the west end of the town.
Second: During winter months collect the seep water issuing from the slope immediately above the canal before it surfaces and freezes.
To meet these objectives, all five alternatives call for diverting the
winter time flow from the canal at the west side of town near Jersey Avenue.
The most convenient location to dispose of this water is the existing
subdrain approximately 1500 feet west of Jersey Avenue. This structure and
line will be referred to as the Jersey Avenue spill in the rest of this
report.
Diverting this flow will limit the water in the canal to the seep water
which enters the ditch downstream of this spill. This will significantly
reduce the quantity of water contributing to ice accumulation and the amount
of water overtopping the canal should it become ice clogged.
Even more importantly, diverting the flow from the canal will eliminate
the problem of snow melt water flooding the canal during ice clogged
conditions.
In the alternatives four different approaches address the second
objective: collecting the seep water issuing from the slope above the Globe
Canal. These approaches will collect the water before it can surface and
freeze causing ice blockages.
LIMITATIONS OF EXISTING SUBDRAIN SYSTEM
During this investigation, the condition and probable capacity of the
existing subdrains which run through Lovell was examined. The pipe size,
manhole rim and pipe flow line elevations and the general condition of the
upper sections of both Drain No.1 and Drain No.2 in the Town of Lovell
were determined. A sketch of these drains is shown on the next page.
Discussion's with the members of the drainage district indicated that
the drains were built sometime before 1930. They were constructed using
three-foot straight barrel (No bell) sections of clay pipe laid open joint.
The drains are currently in poor condition.
Some sections of the drains were filled with gravel, roots and silt,
while other sections were free flowing. The Town of Lovell personnel report
that Drain No.2 occasionally surcharges during summer months, flowing out
of the tops of the manholes. This problem occurs most frequently between
DRAIN NO MH INVERT ELEV. 10 E 25.13 9 E & W 21.50 8 W & N 18.18 7 E & S 14.16
PIPE SIZE 6" 6" 6" 8 11
ADDITION
f2osc:, CFTY W&sr SUBD.
5£.NIOQ ClrtC£NS (jOD/TiON
-5
---;-10 -.,_ >~~ __ ~~: i ... - --l •
"'C'.' 'j
----4 !
--2
FIRST
5---
A DO,IT/ON
8;2
---13 , ! «
16 ---;---:
c-
f.. 3=
! 0 l?
t • I
2 I . L ~
STRONGS I • I t I
I I
) I I PLAt "A" I
:f
EXISTING DRAIN SYSTEM
MH 8 and MH 5. From our mid-November observations it appears that this
section of the drain is severly clogged. In mid-November 1989, this drain
was flowing approximately 1/3 full. The drainage district said that the
section of this drain which runs diagonally southwest of Camron Avenue
across the school district1s acreage is in poor condition. Portions of this
segment have required repair due to pipe collapse.
The school district is currently planning for a building project on
their acreage. The project architect indicates that the school district is
exploring relocating a portion of this drain.
The grade of the existing drain would provide a capacity of about 1.5
CFS ina new 1011 1 i ne. However, the capac i ty of the present 1 i ne is
estimated to be only 30% of that or about 0.5 CFS.
Drain No. 2 discharges at the extreme north end of Montana Street. The
landowner on whose property the drain discharges, said that he has not
noticed an appreciable difference between summer and winter flow levels in
the drain. He has a water gap cut in the tile in which the top 1/2 of the
pipe is removed for livestock watering. It provides a clear view of the
volume carried by this 24" pipe.
Drain No. 1 in mid-November 1989 was submerged with non-flowing water
for most of its length along 7th Street. Heavy root intrusion occurs in the
middle manhole of this run of pipe. Some slow moving flow was evident in
the manhole on the east end of 7th Street where this drain turns north. The
town staff reports no winter time problems with either of the drains.
Although these drains are not in good condition, they could accept the
rather small amount of winter time flow that would be diverted to them.
Flows would NOT be diverted to these drains in summer months.
AREA OF GREATEST SEEPAGE PROBLEMS
Throughout the course of this investigation efforts were made to
identify the area(s) which contributed the most seep water to
And local officials were asked which reaches of the canal had
experienced greatest ice flooding problems.
the canal.
historically
Flow measurements were made in the Globe Canal in late November 1989.
This was approximately one month after both the Globe and Elk-Lovell Canals
had been shut down. By this time all irrigation run-off had ceased and the
residual flow in the canal was from seep water. Measurements were made
using a modified Parshall Flume with a 311 throat. Flows found in Globe
Canal were as follows:
South End of Jersey Ave.
Flow Entering From Doerr Draw
West Side of Shoshone Ave.
75 1 West of Nevada Ave.
South End of Lincoln Ave.
West Side of Garfield Ave.
8 gpm
17 gpm
17 gprn
21 gpm
27 gpm
55 gpm
It is obvious that measurable water loss occurs between Jersey and Shoshone
Avenues. This area has a history of seep water flooding lawns and daylight
basements during the summer irrigation season when the canal flows at
maximum capacity. Also, Doerr Draw contributes the major portion of the
flow on the west end of town.
From casual observation of active seeps it appears that far more than 4
gpm is entering the canal in the two blocks between Shoshone and Nevada
Avenues. While flow measurements donlt show it, it is safe to assume water
is seeping from the ~anal and loss is probably about the same as inflow.
The area contributing the largest amount of seep water lies on the east
end of the canalis reach through Lovell. In the three block section between
Nevada and Garfield Avenues the flow almost triples. And the greatest
portion of that inflow occurs in the one block section between Lincoln and
Garfield Avenues. The flow doubles in this one block section alone.
The most persistent ice flooding problems occur in this three block
reach of the canal. This area has repeatedly flooded according to local
officials. The only property not reporting a history of flooding is the Joe
Cobos property; on the west side of Garfield immediately below the canal and
abutting Eight Street. All other properties immediately below the canal in
this area report ice flooding problems.
In conclusion, both flow measurements and the history of ice flooding
indicate that the worst problems are on the extreme east end of town and to
a lesser degree on the extreme west end of town. The central part of the
canal is comparatively trouble free. This correlates closely with the
level of agricultural irrigation activities on the Lovell Bench immediately
above these areas.
IMPACTS OF FUTURE SEEP WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
There are several items of consideration in evaluating the impact of
any future ground water drain system. First, removal of the seep water
during summer months will almost certainly impact the vigor of the trees and
other seep water fed vegetation growing on the hillside above the Globe
Canal. This wooded area is viewed as an asset by many local residents.
To diminish this impact it may be possible to configure the drains so
they can be valved off during the growing session. If a successful va1ving
system can be configured, seep water would follow traditional routes
summer and be drained away during freezing weather. This would be
experimental.
during
highly
The option va1ving of the drains could only be successfully applied
with Alternative No.5, installing a drain on the Lovell Bench. This option
could not be successfully applied to the spur drains laid from the canal up
slope. Valving the drain on, under Alternative No.5, would be an
experimental undertaking. It would require careful configuration of the
drain to devise a mechanism to assure that the seep water could not simply
follow the gravel envelope and surface rather than following its traditional
flow patterns.
Any drain system extending from the canal up slope must be designed to
wi~hstand the continued movement in the unstable slump blocks above the
canal. The Town of Lovell reports that slippage of this unstable ground in
Garfield Avenue was severe enough that it uncoupled a joint in the water
main over the canal causing a major leak. There are several synthetic drain
materials which, with proper design consideration, should withstand the
degree of movement expected.
EXPECTATIONS FOR PROJECT RESULTS
DRAINAGE IS NOT A PRECISE SCIENCE. This is especially true when
applying drainage treatments to a unique set of problems such as
confronted in this project. The drainage alternatives developed in
rehabilitation plan represent logical approaches, all of which will
Each alternative will yield its own individual degree of success.
today's knowledge, however, there is no way to accurately predict
comparative level of success of the different alternatives. Only
technical judgment based on experience can be used to make
predictions.
those
this
work.
With
the
sound
those
None of the alternative solutions can entirely remove the offending
seep water, nor were they intended to. Some ice accumulation will continue,
perhaps to the extent that ice flooding problems may still occur in the
future. The project sponsor must be cognizant of this fact and expectations
of the solutions must be realistic. The objective strived for is not to
entirely solve the problem (that is probably not achievable) but to reduce
it1s magnitude to the degree that the currently affected people can live
with it.
ALTERNATIVE NO. 1
Construct Drains in Doerr Draw, Shoshone, Nevada and Garfield Avenues. Discharge
to existing tile subdrains.
GRAPHlC SCALE I ~
II! a
i
U
"- l1
li
3870 -
(
36110 -
~- I I I
I I
~-
J&36 - I
9l£ET r<UUeER I
)
3880
II -)
20 10 o 10 30 20 10 o !e
slo 258+ 70 sta 260+80 stu 263+20
--------------------------- -- ---- ------ ---- -----
sto :='7=:+40
sto 22,5+ 40
I I Cif>\[- 1\1
1\ /\[\J l ) (_JIVl ( __ 1< \ \ \, ' __ ll __ (~_' I !' _ I,j \_.l
STA :290+10 '1"
3870 TYPIL, -' , . "AL <:::ECTION
3860
I 1- ..... , . ----+_ .. , 1-
30 ~I 0 o '10 --, R-) F- ("-,' t\ ['\1 . \ 1 "'-, I ( ), [ J ( ..
(, " , , ',IIU\.:) .' ! 1\\ Il ) ( ) I\~ C: ,-< (J ""l'.~\ f I )/\I .. ;L ~ 1-< -\ \ _.- ' ..
3860 . ____ _
30 20 '10 o 10 20 30 40 30 20 10 o 10 20
STA 307+90 STA 299+80
/ .:;86U ____________ _ " ~,860
jU 2U iO o 10 20
::; 1 A 311 + 50 ':::TA .3'16+ 4(1
(~ LOB E C: i~ ~\J /\ L_
R A~~ 0 C)~~ CR OSS ~lE c= TI ()['J S
STA 320+40
---.... L -----~....--'~-,r--'
/ ~o~O -I-------7'/I--+----c---···-
1
·Ju::J
,f-) /' I I I //r-'I ~.,~ ./.'/ i i
/' / I
--1-'-//-/ --+1 __ 1--__ '-+-/-/-. -1--+-----1----L-'34G I I I I
30 20 10 0 '10 20 ,)\) L~O
STA323·~50
3,5=)0. __ ..... ___ . ___ ._ .. __________ + ____________ _
/// 3845 ----+------_.,-_ .. ,----- .
/ //
/' .//-,---, \j: // 3340 ---rl----i--\·-+-i -~-;'---/-I-; ----r---t--
:SO 20 '10 0 10 20 30
STA 329+00
•
\ ,
/
•
3855
./
~)(LJ7 \0 0
~®\ \ \ \ \ \
•
r I
!I'""!w.-o 300 600
/" == 600'
•
iGra~i ~
--- -I
- -- -- -/ ') / / 1\ •
\ \
\
"
\
\ \
'\.,
" "
7th St.
t;;;.~=~ uu- .. • •• .. . : .. : ..... :
•• • • •
•• • •• • hI· • .. ,
---, ~ ) '- -_/ - - ---,
\ 6th St. L.J- • \ Pa rk I \ I' II
• • w • • (l) U\ I • •• 0 I • • •
\ II • • • •• • • \1 8th St.
• •• >, •• QJ
ltv If)
~ QJ .1. • "":l
..... ,~ I .~ • • • q'JI.~ 1'tJ \
\ t.. .. ~ ... ~----'"""IIP5
•
0
\- ~
• • • • • ••••••• • • ,- :11- :1: ~~.
~====~~====~~~==~ ~====~I I· • •
• I •
• ••••• •
QJ C o .c ~'1 o .c VI
• • • • • •
• •
• II
• • •••• • • •
•• •
• • --
• • • •• .11 • • • • ••••• • •• • • ~ • • • • III • • • • • • • • • rnJory
•••• • ~~ • .1 0 I +.> z:
.~ c • )( .... W 10
~ • •• Q
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
\
" c:8 r-----~-
\
•
I
I • • I I I
I
Estimated Cost $278,000
\
\
\ • \
\
3893
I
(
>, QJ ,... c
;a:;: :f
\
\
•
C!) Ql
"'hJ
CJ '-u 0 ti) C!)
"'(
~CJ
c:: tJ
1:; u)
~ Ql I..... ~ 0
~ C.:l
Cr) Q) §' t: § -ss ~
"" l'O .d g'l: WO
If)
c o 'r-+.> rtI O'l .,... .... ~ .. '" > • c 0 .... z
,... QJ rtI > C .,... 10 of-l U 10
C QJ s...
..0 QJ o +.>
G<
~
ALTERNATIVE NO. 1
ESTIMATED COST
$274,000
DESCRIPTION
Alternative No. 1 places needed drains within existing canal and city
rights-of-way to the maximum extent possible. Only three easements or
rights-of-way would be required. These are discussed later.
Under this alternative, the primary drains which would be constructed,
from west to east, would be located in:
The Jersey Avenue Spill
Doerr Draw, with a spur drain to the west
Shoshone Avenue, with a west spur drain near 10th Street
Nevada Avenue
Garfield Avenue, with a spur drain to the west
The Jersey Avenue spill line would be tied into the existing drain
crossing the school district parcel which is west of Jersey Avenue and south
of 7th Street. The winter seep water flow collected form Doerr Draw and
Shoshone Avenue would be piped to 9th and Montana then north on Montana to
be discharged to the existing subdrain at Montana and 6th.
The conveyance line along the canal between Kansas and Montana Avenues
would be constructed of watertight pipe installed in the canal bank. Flow
from the Nevada Avenue line would be piped to 8th and Nevada then west on
8th Street to Montana Avenue where it would inte~sect the new drain
described above. The Garfield Avenue drain would be piped north to 7th
Street then 1/2 block west on 7th Street to discharge to the existing drain.
It must be understood that the collected SEEP WATER WOULD BE DISCHARGED
TO THE EXISTING DRAINS ONLY DURING WINTER MONTHS.
ADVANTAGES
Alternative No.1 would require only three easement acquisitions. All
but 3500 feet of its 9700 feet of total drain length would be constructed in
existing public rights-of-way. All collected drain water would be
discharged to the existing subdrains in the Town of Lovell. This would
eliminate freezing problems with the collected seep water, a feature not
offered by any of the other alternatives. This alternative will offer
moderate maintenance costs. Construction would require only 1100 feet of
construction along the canal right-of-way. It would require disrupting
little of the hillside vegetation between Jersey and Garfield Avenues. And
it would have little affect on the existing canal or its turnouts.
DISADVANTAGES
This alternative ranks third in construction co·st. Because the
location of drains are limited to existing rights-of-ways, this system
configuration doesn't lend itself to efficient collection of the seep water.
As such, the drains will not be intercepting as much of the seep water flow
as other alternatives. It is the least effective of all drainage
alternatives. Accumulations of damaging ice would be diminished but not
eliminated.
With the conveyance pipe located in the canal bank between Kansas and
Montana Avenues, any wash-out in this area would damage the pipe as well.
Canal cleaning activities in this area would require caution not to damage
either the pipe in the canal bank or the drain lines at the four required
crossings.
During construction this alternative would require extensive
replacement of street surfacing, will conflict with more underground
utilities and would disrupt more local traffic than any other alternative.
UTILITY CONFLICTS
Alternative No. 1 would require working around many public and private
utilities. From west to east, utilities that are known to conflict with the
routing of this alternative are:
Doerr Draw to Shoshone Avenue; few if any utilities would be encountered
Shoshone Avenue; City water and sewer CATV and Gas - Unknown Telephone Overhead Power
Montana Avenue; City water and sewer full length of Montana Ave. and crossings at every intersection All Others Unknown
Shoshone Avenue to Montana along canal bank - No Known Utilities
Nevada Avenue; City water and sewer CATV, Telephone & Gas - Unknown Overhead Power
Garfield Avenue; City water and sewer All Other Utilities Unknown
EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Either permanent easements or rights-of-way would be required for the
construction and maintenance of the drains in the following locations:
Jersey Avenue Spill, 1400 ft.
Doerr Draw, 1000 ft.
Spur drain west of Shoshone and north of lOth Street, 600 ft.
Spur drain west of Garfield Avenue, 500 feet
Lengths of the above easements are only scaled distances given to the
nearest 100 feet.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
This alternative would disturb a considerable footage of city streets.
This commits nearly $40,000 of the project budget to street repair. And it
will cause considerable traffic disruption.
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COSTS
Project: GLOBE CANAL INVESTIGATIONS Date: 12/89
Project No: 405-01-00-89 Estimate By: James Gores & Associates
ALTERNATIVE NO.1: PLACE DRAINS IN SHOSHONE, NEVADA AND GARFIELD AVENUES
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Description
Spill Structure
8" Spill Line
Seep Water Drain Line
Seep Water Conveyance Line
Pavement Repair
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL
Easement Acquisition & Surveying
Engineering~ Contingencies~ Legal Inspection & Administration *
TOTAL
Quantity
1
1400
3700
4600-
4450
3500
35%
Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
L.S. 12,000.00 12,000.00
L.F. 10.00 14,000.00
L. F. 20.00 74,000.00
L.F. 12.00 55,200.00
L.F. 8.50 37,825.00
193,025.00
L. F. 5.00 17,500.00
210,525.00
67,558.75
278,000.00
ALTERNATIVE NO. 2
Encase Globe Canal, install drains in up slope seeps and convey collected water in the
encasement pipe.
,J - --• 3855
•
,/
~ffL!( \0 0
~®\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\
\ \
\
"
7th SL
I. Ii- • I • :: : •• • I - : II • : I : ~~: ..... : :...... ~~.
~~~ ~====~~====~~====~ ~==~~I •• • • •
I· • •
• • • •
~·I~~==~_====~~==~-===~~-====~~·~==~ I' - ...... .... ...... ....... II ••• .•• •
• • • •• • • • ~
•
- --" I ) , --_/ -----, \ 6th St. ~.:=.=-====~~=~=~ \Park :'
I
• •
•••• • I
• • • •
• • -I Arrrlory
~~ .~ 0 ... ~z
.~;.- c . "~-LU f
~==~~====~C=======.==.==~~==~==~~~~==~~===.==.~~.~ ••• 3E~~~~.a~~a.~~~~C~====~ • I
0; I
I I
I
II II
I ...,* .
I ..... "''I~ q'l~ .,~ \
• •
• 8th St.
• •
••••• • •
• •••• •••••••• • •• •• •••• • • • • • • • • • ......... !====:::!
• ••• •
• •• • • • • • • • • • •
J.. ... ~ , .. ~----~,.s--- -••• •
• •
• Estimated Cost $ 678,000
\
3893 •
·1 I
( '1
VI C o ';; "' 0'1 .,... ... ~ N > • C 0 -z .- Il.1
"' > c .,.. "' ;..I U rQ
C Il.1 s..
.Q <l.i o ... G<
1-----_--"-, I J J I I
r : I I I , { ,~/~---------------------------
Dra;n and Conveyance L;ne used ;n Alternative No. I
----- -------- ----.",,--- ----,-------------,~
Canal Encasement used ;n Alternative No. 2
Dra;n Option used in Alternative No. 2
Figure 3 -,
------~
ALTERNATIVE NO.2
ESTIMATED COST
$678,000
DESCRIPTION
Alternative No.2 calls for encasing the entire Globe Canal from just
west of Kansas Avenue east to Garfield Avenue in either a 33 or 36 inch
reinforced concrete pipe. All seep water would be collected by constructing
gravel encased drains running up slope from this pipe. These drains would
collect seep water from offending slump areas. They would be tapped into
the concrete encasement pipe and that pipe would then serve as a conduit for
the collected drain water.
This alternative also requires the construction of the Jersey Avenue
Spill. The concrete pipe encasement of the canal will require both
and outlet structures to the pipe. The lateral drains uphill from the
would be strategically located to collect seep water concentrated in
inlet
pipe
the
hillside above the canal as depicted in the sketch of this alternative. As
with all the other alternatives, this one will require the construction of
a drain in the Doerr Draw, south of Jersey and Kansas Avenues.
Seep water collection drains would essentially be perpendicular to the
canal and run up slope to collect seep water from those areas identified as
principal contributors to seep water flow and ice accumulation. These
lateral drains would be constructed of corrugated plastic pipe encased in
gravel and mayor may not be wrapped in a geotextile filter fabric. Some
styles of totally synthetic drains may prove acceptable and offer cost
savings. Regardless of the configuration of the drains they must be
constructed to withstand continued downhill creep movement and the slump
blocks which they would be draining.
CANAL ENCASEMENT OPTION: As described above, the concrete pipe
encasement of the canal is scheduled to stop at the east edge of Garfield
Avenue. That pipe encasement could be extended to the box culvert on
McKinley Avenue if it is viewed by the sponsor that that section of the
canal warrants the expense of encasement. However, in assembling this
investigation no incidents of ice caused flooding damage was reported east
of Garfield Avenue.
DRAIN WATER CONVEYANCE OPTION: Rat~er than conveying the collected
seep water in the concrete encasement pipe the water could be carried in a
gravel encased drain line constructed immediately adjacent to and on the
uphill side of the concrete encasement pipe. This drain system is to be
constructed simultaneously with the pipe encasement and would be placed in
the existing canal along with the encasement pipe itself. This combination,
drain and conveyance pipe, would receive collected seep water from the
uphill spur drains and would serve the function of collecting seep water now
surfacing on the slope of the canal itself. This drain would terminate on
the east side of Garfield Avenue along with the concrete encasement.
This approach to the collection and conveyance would add a collection
mechanism between the spur drains running uphill and would eliminate the
necessity of tapping the uphill spur drains into concrete pipe.
Measures would have to be taken to limit winter time cold air flow in
the canal encasement pipe to prevent freezing of the adjacent soil as well
as the parallel and drain itself.
ADVANTAGES
This alternative, like all others, would divert free flowing water in
the canal into the Jersey Avenue Spill and discharge that collected water to
the existing subdrain crossing the school property. With careful placement
of the drain lines this alternative would be the most effective at removing
nuisance seep water. This alternative would encase the canal through town
eliminating the present attractive nuisance which the canal creates. Also,
it should reduce available mosquito breeding areas within the town.
Encasement of the canal could create an open pathway, potentially available
to jogging and similar recreational activities. This alternative conflicts
only moderately with other existing private and public utilities. It will
provide a low maintenance drainage system and it ~'ill reduce maintenance of
the Globe Canal itself.
DISADVANTAGES
Cost of this alternative ranks highest of all systems considered.
Constructing the seep water spur lines up slope of the canal would scar the
existing hillside vegetation and would require extensive easement
acquisition from adjacent property owners. Construction of these spur
drains would be difficult and costly. Because installation of the uphill
spur drains will very likely remove most of the current seep water from the
hillside, it will quite likely result in a reduced vigor of the vegetation
on the hillside. A program of removing dead vegetation from the hillside
will be required to avert potential fire hazards. All construction
activities will be taking place in a congested and confined work area.
Those areas bordered by homes would be very difficult to work in.
Preconstruction activities will require test drilling on the hillside to
define optimum location of the lateral drains.
UTILITY CONFLICTS
This alternative
water crossings will
would require modest utility conflicts.
be necessitated at Shoshone, Nevada and
Sewer and
Garfield
Avenues. A sewer crossing will be required at Montana Avenue. Some
crossings of gas, power and cable TV may be required at these avenues as
well. No other utility conflicts are known to exist.
EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Construction of this alternative will require permanent easement or
rights-of-way for:
Jersey Avenue Spill, 1400 ft.
Doerr Draw Drain, 1000 ft.
Numerous (10 to 15) individual spur drain extensions uphill of the canal, 75 to 200 ft. each
Construction easements will be required to allow adequate equipment access
adjacent to the canal to lay the encasement pipe between Kansas and Garfield
Avenues. The canal right-of-way width is undefined but it is considered to
be 100 feet width. This width, however, will be inadequate to accommodate
required construction activities and temporary construction easements will be
required.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
This alternative will require a longer lead time than will other
alternatives. This is due to the amount of easement and right-of-way
acquisition activities and its required surveying. The reduced foliage
vigor on the hillside up slope of the canal may be v"iewed as a disbenefit by
many local citizens and may be viewed as an economic loss to adjacent
property owners. This alternative will require the direct involvement of
the larger number of people because of the associated easement acquisitions.
As such, greater involvement will be required by the sponsor, their legal
counsel and local political leaders.
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COSTS
Project: GLOBE CANAL INVESTIGATIONS
Project No: 405-01-00-89
ALTERNATIVE NO.2: ENCASE CANAL, SPOT DRAIN SLUMPS
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
OPT2.CAL
Description
Spill Structure
8" Spill Line
36" Canal Encasement Pipe
Headwall & Outlet Structures
Street Crossing
Turnout
Seep Water Collection & Drain Line
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL
Easement Acquisition & Surveying
SUBTOTAL
Engineering, Contingencies, Legal Inspection & Administration
TOTAL
Encasement Option 36" RCP Drain Conveyance Option
SUBTOTAL
Quantity
1
1400
3200
1
3
12
3500
8050
35%
450 3650
Engineering, Contingencies, Legal Inspection & Administration On Options 35%
TOTAL OPTIONS
TOTAL WITH OPTIONS
Date: 12/15
Estimate By: James Gores & Associates
Unit
L.S.
L. F.
L.F.
L.S.
Ea.
Ea.
L.F.
L. F.
L. F. L.F.
Unit Cost
12,000.00
10.00
70.00.·
18,000.00
8,000.00
1,200.00
30.00
5.00
70.00 8.00
Total Cost
12,000.00
14,000.00
224,000.00
18,000.00
24,000.00
14,400.00
105,000.00
411,400.00
40,250.00
451,650.00
143,990.00
595,640.00
31,500.00 29,200.00
60,700.00
21,245.00
81,945.00
678,000.00
ALTERNATIVE NO.3
Divert free flowing water from the Globe Canal, encase a portion of the canal and collect
seep water only in the most troublesome areas.
.. -(I - ~ A \ .. 11--~ - - ,,~a {U
II S \0 c _ - - ____ . L.-.:"'--'
- -41. -
/'
.J
• 3855 f3i0f~ \0 0
~®\ \ \ \ \ \
•
I I
o 301) 601)
"'=. 600'
--" /
• .x. = •
~ J\Gra~el '/1<") !
\ \
\
\ \
\
"
7th St.
• •• .. . : .. : ..... : f;:;;:.=::;::===! ~U· ·
I
•• • ••
---, ~ ) - -_/ -----l
\ 6th St. rJ- • \ Par k : =,=-=======
w • (X) I U"\ I 01
I
• • •
- . • • • •••• ••• I· • •
• • • I
• •
• • • •••••• !========-====~
• M
• I • • •• • •••• • • • • •
• ••• •••
• •
.. II-• • · . .:
• • • • • •
UUU • •• • • •
• • • • •• • • •
• • ~ • .~ • • • rnlory ~~ .~ 0 .j.J z
.~ ~ c: >< .,.. \.JJ "' s..
•
C
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
-. • • • • • I I
\1 II ., 8th St .• ===;:~;::=~~:::.::~===.~ - _ •• :::.===.====~:=====:: • •
I I .1.
I ·51~ q"~ "I!..'rI \ J.. ..... ~ \
... ~ - - - - ~ 's---
•
o
•
•• Q) I:: 0 ..c IJl Q .c
V'l
•
• ••• • •
•
• 11 • • • •
• Estimated Cost $406,000
\
\
\ \.
3893 \
\
•
Ci) Q) ......., \J
"(3 () Ci) Ci)
~
\:J c:: CJ
Ci) Q) 1.... ()
(:)
Ci) Qj
E -ss
{b .>; :
g'~ wo
to;
~
~ ~ ~ a:
ALTERNATIVE NO. 3
ESTIMATED COST
$406,000
DESCRIPTION
Alternative No. 3 is a scaling back of Alternative No.2. It
collects seepage from only the most problem prone areas of the canal.
In this alternative seep water from Doerr Draw would be piped to the
Jersey Avenue Spill. As with other alternatives, this spill would discharge
to the existing tile drain No.2 on the school property. However, in this
alternative the Jersey Avenue Spill would carry the seep water and the free
flowing water diverted from the canal. The canal would be encased in 33 or
36 inch reinforced concrete pipe from the west side of Nevada Avenue east to
Garfield Avenue. Seep areas in this reach of the canal would be treated by
running lateral drains uphill in the same fashion as Alternative No.2.
ENCASEMENT OPTION: As with Alternative No.2 the canal could be
encased downstream from Garfield Avenue to McKinley Avenue.
DRAIN OPTION: Again, as with Alternative No. 2 the gravel encased
drain and seep water conveyance pipe could be constructed adjacent to and on
the uphill side of the reinforced concrete encasement pipe. This drain
would yield additional benefits in collecting seep water issuing into the
canal bank. In the reach of the canal between Nevada and Garfield Avenues
that is a significantly larger problem then it is upstream. This option of
seep water collection is warranted and recommended in this reach of the
canal.
ADVANTAGES
Alternative No. 3 would
Alternative No.2 by eliminating
offer considerable cost savings over
both the canal encasement and uphill spur
drains between Kansas and Nevada Avenues. This alternative eliminates
approximately 1800 feet of encasement and would eliminate the up slope spur
drains in the reach between Kansas Avenue and Nevada Avenue as well. While
seeps exist in the Kansas to Nevada Avenue area they are less active
the downstream remainder of the canal. Alternative No. 3 would
moderate maintenance on the drains and some reduced maintenance on
canal.
DISADVANTAGES
than
offer
the
As with Alternative No.2, installation of the up slope seep water
drains will scar the hillside and reduce the vigor of the vegetation in the
Nevada Avenue to Garfield Avenue reach of the canal. Constructing these
drains would require permanent easements or rights-of-way from up slope
property owners. Construction of these spur drains would be difficult and
they pose the possibility of drying up hillside vegetation. And as with
Alternative No.2, this may result in an accumulation of dry brush and a
potential fire hazard.
UTILITY CONFLICTS
Alternative No. 3 would require water and sewer crossings at both
Nevada and Garfield Avenues. No other known utility crossings would be
required.
EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS
This alternative would require the following permanent easements or
rights-of-way:
Jersey Avenue Spill, 1400 feet
Doerr Draw, 1200 feet
Easements for approximately 6 up slope seep water spur drains from three different property owners, 100 to 200 feet per drain
Construction easements would be required adjacent to the canal to allow
adequate equipment access to lay the encasement pipe between Nevada and
Garfield Avenues.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
This alternative will require lead time for the easement acquisition
and their associated surveyings. The reduced vigor of the foliage and
visible construction scars on the hillside between Nevada and Garfield
Avenues may be viewed as a disbenefit by local citizens and may be viewed as
a property devaluation to adjacent property owners.
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COSTS
Project: GLOBE CANAL INVESTIGATIONS Date: 12/15
Project No: 405-01-00-89 Estimate By: James Gores & Associates
ALTERNATIVE NO.3: DRAIN DOERR DRAW, SPOT TREAT SEEPS FROM MONTANA TO GARFIELD
Item Description Quantity
1. Spill Structure 1
2. 8" Spill Drain Line 1400
3. Seep Water Drain in Doerr Draw 1200
4. Seep Water Drain Line 1400
5. Seep Water Conveyance Pipe 500
6. 36" Canal Pipe 1400
7. Street Crossing 2
8. Turn outs 4
9. Headwall and Outlet Structures 1 on Canal Piping
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL
Easement Acquisition & Surveying 5400
Engineering, Contingencies, Legal Inspection & Administration 35%
OPT3.CAL
TOTAL
Encasement Option 36" RCP Drain Conveyance Option
SUBTOTAL
450 1850
Engineering, Contingencies, Legal Inspection & Administration On Options 35%
TOTAL OPTIONS
TOTAL WITH OPTIONS
Unit
L. S.
L. F.
L. F.
L. F.
L. F.
L. F.
Ea.
Ea.
L.S.
L. F.
L. F. L.F.
Unit Cost
12,000.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
12.00
70.00
8,000.00
1,200.00
18,000.00
5.00
70.00 8.00
Total Cost
12,000.00
14,000.00
24,000.00
42,000.00
6,000.00
98,000.00
16,000.00
4,800.00
18,000.00
234,800.00
27,000.00
82,180.00
343,980.00
31,500.00 14,800.00
46,300.00
16,205.00
62,505.00
406,000,00
ALTERNATIVE NO.4
Divert free flowing water from the Globe Canal and purchase properties most frequently
ice flooded.
. J
•
\ \
\
3855
./
f3iOl)(LJl \ 0 0
~®\ \ \ \ \ \
•
r I
~-o 300 600
,"=600'
--' -/1/1 ,< ....
: . ~ G ra~el
I
\ \
\
\ \
\
"
7th St.
t;;;::.===t::~
• •• UU· · .. . : .. : ..... : • •• • •
• ••
.... ftI ••
•
• • • • • • · -•••••• •••• •••
I-• •
~==::S======: UUU
• • • •
• • • " • •• ' .. • •
• •••••• • •• • • •
• ~
~.~~==~~====~rl===~~.~==~~~====~~====:~ - --"
I I \ --_/
- - ---, \ 6th St. g. ==.~====~ :==:;::==::; \ Pa rk I \ I'
w • (l) I U"\ I 01 'I II
• •
• 8th St.
•
•
o
• • • • ••
• • • ••• >, Q) VI '-
•• . ~ • • •••• • •
••
•
Q) c: o .c III o .c V'l
•
• • •
•
., It
... -rl I
• • • •• ::=:::====~ • •••• • • • • • • •
• • Ii • • it a
......... fa ~=====:~
• ••• • ••••• • • •
•••
• • •
•
• • • • •
• • •
• • -I • • rnJory
~~
.1 0 +-I z .~ ~ c: )( ..... LJJ ~
Q
• • • • • • • • • • • - • • • • • • • • • •
/
1 • \ \...- \
\ '-" J
r-----~-\
I \
I I I I
I
\
• \
\
3893 • •
Estimated Cost $185,000
•
-,' I --- .- . i -----
i
" '" I:':! d
I
t1
t') Q)
-;.....
tJ '0 0 Ci) iJ)
"'C
'cJ c::: tJ
5 U)
~ Q) ~ ~ 0
~ ()
U) Q)
~ E ~ §
C;:
{o .>;: g~
III c: o .... .., ttl O'l
~ ~~ > • C 0 -z ,..... C,.J ttl > c: 'r-ttl ..,
U ttl c:
Q) '..Q Q) o +...l
G<
en ~ !II
~
(PR~CT~u~j I s~:,,-, .. ,'U:F·o,: :
\ I
---.--~~
!
I
ALTERNATIVE NO.4
ESTIMATED COST
$185,000
DESCRIPTION
Alternative No.4 requires two actions. First, under this alternative
only the Doerr Draw seep water collection and the Jersey Avenue Spill would
be constructed. Its configuration would be the same as in Alternative No.
3. The spill structure would divert the flowing water from the canal and
carry both this water and the collected seep water to drain No.2.
The second action to this alternative would involve purchase of the
properties most often ice flooded below the canal. This would require
purchasing five parcels of property located between Nevada and Garfield
Avenues. Based on local informatio~, these properties are most often
affected by flooding and ice flows. Although adjacent properties may
occasionally be affected, the magnitude of past damages to these properties
does not warrant purchasing them.
ADVANTAGES
This alternative is the the least costly of all alternatives, but only
by 5%. Minimum construction would be required under this alternative.
Operation and maintenance of the drain and spill and Jersey Avenue Spill
would be minimal. The purchased properties could be transferred to public
use for parks or other non-residential purposes. No construction would be
needed up slope of the canal with the exception of constructing the Doerr
Draw seep water drain. This alternative offers the least construction
impacts of any of the alternatives considered in this rehabilitation plan.
It also offers the lowest operation and maintenance cost.
DISADVANTAGES
This alternative WOULD NOT SOLVE the icing problem.' Rather, it would
only purchase those properties most often affected. Reaching mutually
agreeable purchase terms with the affected owners could be difficult.
Because property purchase costs cannot be closely predicted total project
costs can not be estimated with good accuracy.
UTILITY CONFLICTS
Under Alterlative No.4 no known utility crossings would be required.
EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Permanent easements or rights-of-way would be required for the Jersey
Avenue Spill and Doerr Draw~ the same as under Alternative No.3. This
would require 1400 feet of easement for the Jersey Avenue Spill and
approximately 1200 feet of easement for the Doerr Draw seep water drain.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
The action of purchasing affected properties may cause dischord among
the project sponsor and remaining owners adjacent to the canal. It will
also demand much time commitment by local political leaders.
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COSTS
Project: GLOBE CANAL INVESTIGATIONS
Project No: 405-01-00-89
ALTERNATIVE NO.4: BUY OUT AFFECTED PROPERTIES BELOW THE CANAL
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
OPT4.CAL
Description
Spill Structure
8" Spill Drain Line
Seep Water Drain in Doerr Draw
Seep Water Conveyance Line
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL
Purchase Properties with Home
Purchase Property with Mobile Home
SUBTOTAL
Legal Services Associated with Land Purchases
Easement Acquisition & Surveying
Engineering, Contingencies, Legal Inspection & Administration
TOTAL PROJECT
Quantity
1
1400
1200
500
2
3
10%
2600
35%
Date: 12/15
Estimate By: James Gores & Associates
Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
L.S. 12,000.00 12,000.00
L.F. 10.00 14,000.00
L. F. 20.00 24,000.00
L. F. 12.00 6,000.00
56,000.00
Ea. 32,000.00 64,000.00
Ea. 8,000.00 24,000.00
88,000.00
8,800.00
L. F. 5.00 13,000.00
19,600.00
185,000.00
ALTERNATIVE NO. 5
Direct free flowing water from the canal and construct a curtain drain 0 the Lovell
bench immediately above the east end of Lovell.
. J
•
\
/
3855
a
,/
~~\oa ~®\
\ \ \ \ \
-
r i I
I
\ \
\
o 300 600
"':::. 600' --_.
.(c;. : • ~ Gra~el
I
"
\ \
\
"
7th St.
• •• . . . : .. : ..... : • • • • • ••••••• • • • ••••••
• • I - : II • : I : Ltrir::==t===: ~U· · ~~.
~====~~====~~====~ ~====~I • •• • • •
•• ........ •
la • •
h ,. t.=:=::::;-;::=:===: ::=====~ ri==== •• ==\~. ~====~ --- ....... ( ) --_/ - - ---1
\ 6th St. t"J- • \ Par k : -=,;;IJ:::.=====:
I
a • • I
I • 0 I •
\ I • II 8th St. • •
• ••
•
o
• • ::=:~:::::::~
• • ••••••
•• Q)
= 0 .c III 0 .c VI
•
• " ··"f' • • • i' • •
• • • •••• • • • • • • _ . •••• •
•
• ••• . a •
• ••••• • • • • • • •••• •
I • • •
• • • • • • • • • • •
•••
•
• • • a
• •
• •• a • -. • • •
• • • •
• • •
• .~ • • ArnJ.ory
~~
.~ c ~ lie
.~ c
•
>( .,.. LJJ rei
'-C
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
\
" J r-----~\-I \
I I I I
I \
3893 \
• • Estimated Cost $195,000
r I
V) Q)
""N
{J
'G C) V) (,,')
-<:(
0 c: {J
U) Q) l.... C)
~
i
UL. f}j [ \ g'E
w 0
II! C o .,.. ..., rei O'l .,.. ..., ~ I.l'"l > • c 0 ..... z:
,... Q) I'CI > C .-rei o+-l
(,.;) I'CI C
Q) l.e Q) o ..., ,... ,... c.=<
ALTERNATIVE NO. 5
ESTIMATE COST
$195,000
DESCRIPTION
Under this alternative drainage construction would be applied only to
the most problematical sections along the canal. As with the other
alternatives, the Jersey Avenue Spill and the seep water drain in Doerr Draw
would be constructed.
However, this alternative adopts the approach of intercepting
water· between Nevada and Garfield Avenues with a drain on top of the
seep
bench
before it reaches the slope above the canal. This would require
constructing a gravel encased curtain drain at bedrock level, a depth of
about 20 feet. This should provide a positive block to seep water flow
reaching the face of the hill between the bench and the canal. This seep
water drain would be located at the north edge of the cultivated field
extending between Nevada and McKinley Avenues. Collected·seep water would
be conveyed to the canal and discharged on the east side of McKinley Avenue.
This alternative will not entirely eliminate ice accumulation in the
canal but should diminish accumulation to the point of eliminating damage.
ADVANTAGES
This alternative offers the second lowest construction cost of all
systems considered. It is only 5% more costly than Alternative No.4.
Using Alternative No. 5 would require no construction along the canal
through town. Also, it provides a positive blockage to the water source
causing the greatest nuisance. Construction would impact a minimum number
of property owners and the resultant project should offer low maintenance
and operation costs. No work would be required in the canal itself.
DISADVANTAGES
Construction of the 20 foot deep drain on top of the bench will be
difficult and expensive. The private wells located between this drain and
the crest of the bench will be dried up. This may affect approximately four
property owners. However, the collected seep water could be made available
for irrigation to those affected. Finally, interception of this flow will
dry up the hillside down slope of the bench likely causing loss of
vegetation on the face of the hill between Nevada and McKinley Avenues.
This may result in an increase in asso~iated fire hazards in this area.
UTILITY CONFLICTS
Under this alternative no municipal water or sewer crossings are
necessary. Utility conflicts will likely be limited to the power and
telephone paralleling the most promising route.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
As with Alternatives 3 and 4, local citizens may view the reduced
vegetation above the canal between Nevada and McKinley Avenues as a
disbenefit. Also, adjacent property owners may view any reduction in the
vigor of this wooded areas as a devaluation of their properties.
{f
<l -. C: . . (: C (;
CJJ
~
't.l c:: tJ
V) OJ ~ Cl
C,,:.)
Clj OJ
E J;J
.i
I I I i , i I
11'1 c:: o ..-.... '" CIt
tl ! !I ~
,:
~ ~
J ~.
~ li!
.... Q ........ 11'1 0 CII .II: > Q. c - .-II;! ';'t: c CII 10 <
U
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COSTS
Project: GLOBE CANAL INVESTIGATIONS Date: 12/15
Project No: 405-01-00-89 Estimate By: James Gores & Associates
ALTERNATIVE NO.5: CONSTRUCT DRAIN NEAR NORTH EDGE OF LOVELL BENCH
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
OPTS. CAL
Description
Spill Structure
8" Spill Drain Line
Seep Water Drain in Doerr Draw
Doerr Draw Seepwater Conveyance Line
Curtain Drain on Lovell Bench Between Nevada and McKinley Ave.
Drain Outlet
Street Crossing
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL
Easement Acquisition & Surveying
Engineering~ Contingencies, Legal Inspection & Administration
TOTAL PROJECT
Quantity
1
1400
1200
500
2500
1
1
5100
35%
Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
L.S. 12,000.00 12~000.OO
L. F. 10.00 14,000.00
L. F. 20.00 24,000.00
L. F. 12.00 6,000.00
L. F. 25.00 62,500.00
L.S 3,000.00 3,000.00
Ea. 4,000.00 4,000.00
125,500.00
L.F. 5.00 25~500.00
43,925.00
195,000.00
SECTION 4
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The ranking of alternatives given in Figure 4-1 simply compares the
five alternative in the following six categories:
1. Cost
2. Conflicts with Streets, Roads and Utilities
3. Easement Requirements
4. Probable Operation and Maintenance Costs
5. Impact Properties Adjacent to the Canal
6. Probable Effectiveness in Removing Seep Water and the Degree to which the Alternative would solve the problem
No attempt was made to assign weighting factors of the comparative
importance of these criteria. Those are decisions which should be left to
the local sponsor. Alternates were simply ranked from best to least
desirable for each criteria and given numerical rankings of 1 to 5
respectively.
Ranking the alternatives considered each category as described below.
1. COST
Alternatives were ranked based on total project cost. This includes
construction costs, the cost of surveying and acquiring needed easements or
real property and related non-construction costs. Non-construction costs
include engineering design, construction inspection, contingencies, legal
and administration costs. These costs were estimated at 35% of total
construction as follows: Engineering Design 10%, Construction Inspection
10%, Contingencies 10%, Legal Services 3% and Administration 2%.
Construction costs were estimated using scaled map distances for line
lengths and applying recent similar construction costs to those quantities.
It must be understood that these costs are only general estimates and are
meant to show only comparative cost magnitude between alternatives. Costs
given for estimates of real property purchases are general estimates based
on conversations with local real estate professionals.
2. UTILITY CONFLICTS
A general assessment was made of the number of utility crossings and
street closures necessitated by each alternative. Conflicts with, and
interruptions of, existing utilities impact both construction costs and the
inconvenience of local residence. As such, they become an important
consideration.
3. EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Each alternative requires different amounts of easement or rights-of
way to install needed drains and associated improvements. Acquisitions of
these easements will require lead time to conduct land surveys, negotiate
with the property owner, and if necessary, take legal condemnation action to
acquire the necessary rights-of-way. The complexity of the project
increases as easement requirements increase.
4. PROBABLE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
Each alternative was evaluated in general terms for its probable future
operation and maintenance costs. No detailed estimate of these costs were
assembled but rather the project configuration was reviewed from the aspect
of the number of drains, manholes and pipelines, and other constructed
improvements which will require maintenance expenditures.
5. IMPACTS ON PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO THE CANAL
Each alternative was reviewed for its impact on properties adjacent to
the canal. This includes, among other factors, installation of seep water
drains on adjacent properties and surface damages that would result with the
installation of the drains. Attention was given to this factor because
local officials had expressed a wish to minimize, if possible, damage to the
growth of trees and other vegetation now occurr ng on the hillside above the
canal.
6. PROBABLE EFFECTIVENESS
A general assessment was made of each alternative1s probable
effectiveness in removing seep water and eliminating the canal icing
problem. The degree to which each alternative will be effective in removing
seep water is almost directly proportional to the number of drains that are
installed. In general, the removal of seep water will become increasingly
effective as more drains are installed and more construction costs are
incurred. The degree of elimination of seep water is proportional to the
intensity of the program undertaken.
Alternatives other than the five presented in this report were looked
into. Those included a program to implement sprinkler irrigation on all
agricultural properties on the north edge of the Lovell bench. By
converting to sprinkler irrigation the amount of applied irrigation water
could be reduced. This action would in turn reduce the quantity of seep
water generated. Consideration was also given to the out-right purchase of
the cultivated properties between Lane 12 and the north edge of the Lovell
Bench. Both of these alternatives were judged not to be readily
implementable. Further consideration of these concepts were terminated.
CONCLUSIONS
Each of the five alternatives developed in this rehabilitation
will offer varying degrees of relief to the icing problem in the
Canal. Costs of those alternatives range from a high of $678,000 to a
of approximately $185,000.
plan
Globe
low
Alternative No.2, if built, could be designed to eliminate nearly all
of the offending seep water. It, however, is the most costly of all those
considered and would impact the adjacent property owners far more than other
alternatives considered. It would offer an elimination of the attracted
nuisance which the canal now constitutes. Also, it would significantly
reduce maintenance requirements of the Globe Canal through town.
Alternative No. 4 involves the least construction and cost of all
alternatives. It, however, would do little to solve the ice clogging
problem. Rather, it would only purchase land space to allow the ice flooding
problem to continue with less damage. Ice flooding and its associated
nuisances would continue but would impact adjacent residence less.
Nonetheless, it would provide a means of alleviating some impacts which
currently occur.
Alternative No. 5 offers costs nearly as low and provides an acceptable
reduction in the magnitude of the ice clogging in the Globe Canal. It
requires no construction in the canal right-of-way itself and construction
does not impact properties adjacent to the canal. Some continued ice
accumulation in the canal should be expected if this alternative is
implemented. However, the severity of the problem should be reduced to the
extent that minimal future damage would occur. It is expected though, that
with the installation of this curtain drain much of the seep will be removed
year-round. This will reduce the water now reaching the vegetation on the
hillside. It also will impact the private wells which lie between the crest
of the hill and the curtain drain. Those homeowners affected may be able
to install a pump irrigation system which would use the collected seep water
as an irrigation water source.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Construct the Doerr Draw Drain, the Jersey Avenue Spill and ~ Curtain
Drain on Lovell Bench. Based on the evaluation of the alternatives
developed in this rehabilitation plan it is recommended that the sponsor
develop a preliminary design and detailed cost estimate for Alternative No.
5. This alternative offers the best possibility for success of all the
concepts which were developed in this evaluation. It provides a cost
nearly as low as the least expensive approach. It also offers the
potential of constructing the project in two phases.
The first phase could include the Jersey Avenue Spill and Doerr Draw
Drain. The sponsor(s) could, if they wished, operate the system on a trial
basis with those improvements in place. This would allow the opportunity to
see if the diversion of upstream waters alleviated the icing problem to the
extent that it would be acceptable to the local residence and political
entities.
The second phase could be constructed if significant problems continue
to occur. The curtain drain on the Lovell Bench between Nevada and
Garfield Streets could be constructed as the second phase. This would remove
seep water in this most problematical reach of the canal.
Additionally, this alternative offers the ability to extend the
curtain drain west of Nevada Street, should problems persist. To implement
this option the curtain drain could be extended south along the alley on the
east side of Nevada Avenue to the alley immediately north of Wyoming Street.
The drain could be routed west through this alley and continue west on
Tenth Street to the east edge of Doerr Draw. Installing a drain of this
magnitude would remove most of the offending seep water from the hill slope
above the Globe Canal.
It is further recommended that the preliminary design be developed to
provide this phased construction concept.
It is because of this alternative's effectiveness versus its cost,
its ability to be constructed in phases and its ability to be extended to
accomplish a more comprehensive removal o'~ seep water that leads to
recommending this alternative.
SPONSORSHIP RECOMMENDATIONS
The problem of ice accumulation in Globe Canal more than anything else
is a result of an irrigation drainage problem. The problem area abuts both
the Lovell and Lovell Bench Drainage Drainage Districts. As such, the
sponsorship of the project should include, if not be lead by,· these two
districts. From a practical standpoint, the project would best be sponsored
by a body comprised of the Globe Canal (Farmers Protective Association), the
Drainage Districts, the Town of Lovell and perhaps, Big Horn County.
Under WWDC rules the project sponsor must "be a legally formed
This would include all entities mentioned above with the exception
Farmers Protective Association.
entity.
of the
RANKING OF ALTERNATIVES
(/)
I.I.J ~ .... 0:: U.I 0..
V') V') 01 .... .... 0:: z: Z z: 0..
V') U.I L.J.J 01 .... .... :E z: .... >- u z: U.I L.J.J (/) z: .... ~ L.J.JC::= 0:: .... I..LJ ~ -' :E~ s:~ uu .... -' L.L.. I..LJ :::> :::> «
V') ~ z: V') 0' or.s 0' 0.. I'J 0 .... 01 <U.I L.J.J xc u :::> u I..LJC::= 01 c::= ~<
ALTERNATIVE NO. 1 278,000 5 3 4 3
ALTERNATIVE NO. 2 678,000 4 5 5 5
ALTERNATIVE NO. 3 406,000 3 2 3 2
ALTERNATIVE NO. 4 185,000 1 1 1 1
ALTERNATIVE NO. 5 195,000 2 4 2 3
Ranking: 1 is lowest/least severe/most effective
5 is highest/most severe/least effective
Figure 4-1
(/) V') I.I.J z: L.J.J > ~ .... u I..LJ L.L.. L.L.. I..LJ
4
1
2
5
3
Chen~ Northern, Inc.
James Gores & Associates 450A South Federal Blvd. Riverton, Wyoming 82501
Attention: Mr. Jim G( res
November 27, 1989
COIlSlJlllflg Engineers and SC1e:l\lsts
GOS r'Jorth Warenousc Rmcl PO Box 2599 182602) Ca'>oer. Wyon"rlg 82601
30723~-212G J07 266-51 ~3 t:v::;ilnl!c!
Subject: Transmittal of Laboratory Test Results Job No. 89-4358
Dear Mr. Gores:
Transmitted with this letter are the laboratory test results for the soil sample submitted to our office on November 9, 1989. The sample was identified as having been obtained from the south end of Washington, Goble Canal Project.
The soil sample was tested for moisture content, dry density, gradation and Atterberg limits. An attempt was made to perform an in-liner permeability to determine the permeability of the soil. This test failed due to the disturbed nature of the soil sample received. Piping occurred during the test invalidating the test results. Laboratory test results are summarized in Table I.
Based on the t~~t results_,?we anticipate permeability of t~e sOi.l will range between lXlO to lXlO cm/sec. The actual permeabi11ty wl11 be dependent upon the in-place dry density of the soil and/or the percent of maximum dry density the soil is compacted to. Actual permeabi1ities can also vary significantly with change in soil properties.
If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please cell.
SMH:ked Enclosure
A nl-3mber of ttle [HIH] group of companies
Sincerely,
CHEN-NORTHERN,
BY ___ 1./ ~~~~~~~~~~~/~---
(/
1) GRADATION
2) HYDROMETER
Sieve Size
No. No.8 No. 16 No. 30 No. 50 No. 100 No. 200
TABLE I
Laboratory Test Results
% Passing
100 98 96 95 93 89 81
Particle Size (mm) % Passing
3)
4)
0.050 0.037 0.019 0.009 0.005 0.002 0.001
ATTERBERG LIMITS
Liquid Limit, %: Plasticity Index,
MOISTURE-DENSITY
Field Moisture, %: Dry Density, pcf:
Job No. 89-4358 November 27, 1989
37 %: 18
25.9 94.8
75 71 58 46 40 36 26
( ) -
-l-(j-) (~) ',---"
L
///'
o 2
I 3
SPOMER
r") (~) t l
I \ \- \ II \ '
2 w > «
.3 4
~
LLl > « (Jl « (J)
« ~
®
()l
CJ
OWNER HIP II\J A POI~~TIOr\j O~ fJLOCI<S 7,8,& ~j, Llf\J[\JABAR\( /\ I) n r TI n ~\j, PI /\ T n
o « « Q:::: LLJ
CL 2 -:( -> ".:;:,. .-
Ii r --~-------------------------
(4
(-)WN ER SH I P '-' I "-' I i f\J AI P (=) R -r I (~) 1'\\/
BL_OC://< 41 ~ 6' 7 Qj) (~ , '--- J I ) LX, C_.l
1\_.,: I I ''vI Il_ vV ;\ L) l) I 1'/ (._) (\\J ( 11 C·) t t u ::; , II
LLl > «
w
ANDERSON
! !
~
TOWN OF
LOVELL
w > «
0 /-C)
z
(f)
« 3:
\GHTH ST
BED DES
7) TOWN OF FINK
LOVELL
BEDDES BEDDES eN N (Jl
+ 0 0
w > «